Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness
The article presents point of view on the modern art as the field for innovations of the artists. The author critically describes main features of the modern art, investigates its background, analyse its main techniques and finds the place of “the new” in the art.
Збережено в:
| Дата: | 2011 |
|---|---|
| Автор: | |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | Ukrainian |
| Опубліковано: |
Інститут філософії імені Г.С. Сковороди НАН України
2011
|
| Назва видання: | Світогляд - Філософія - Релігія |
| Теми: | |
| Онлайн доступ: | http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/39553 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Цитувати: | Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness / A. Pastuszek // Світогляд - Філософія - Релігія: Зб. наук. пр. — Суми: ДВНЗ "УАБС НБУ", 2011. — № 2(2). — Бібліогр.: 8 назв. — англ. |
Репозитарії
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| id |
irk-123456789-39553 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
irk-123456789-395532012-12-20T12:22:06Z Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness Pastuszek, A. Культурологія The article presents point of view on the modern art as the field for innovations of the artists. The author critically describes main features of the modern art, investigates its background, analyse its main techniques and finds the place of “the new” in the art. У статті презентується погляд на сучасне мистецтво як поле для інновацій митців. Автор критично описує головні риси сучасного мистецтва, досліджує передумови його виникнення, аналізує його головні прийоми та знаходить місце “нового” в мистецтві. 2011 Article Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness / A. Pastuszek // Світогляд - Філософія - Релігія: Зб. наук. пр. — Суми: ДВНЗ "УАБС НБУ", 2011. — № 2(2). — Бібліогр.: 8 назв. — англ. XXXX-0108 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/39553 130.2 uk Світогляд - Філософія - Релігія Інститут філософії імені Г.С. Сковороди НАН України |
| institution |
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| collection |
DSpace DC |
| language |
Ukrainian |
| topic |
Культурологія Культурологія |
| spellingShingle |
Культурологія Культурологія Pastuszek, A. Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness Світогляд - Філософія - Релігія |
| description |
The article presents point of view on the modern art as the field for innovations of the artists. The author critically describes main features of the modern art, investigates its background, analyse its main techniques and finds the place of “the new” in the art. |
| format |
Article |
| author |
Pastuszek, A. |
| author_facet |
Pastuszek, A. |
| author_sort |
Pastuszek, A. |
| title |
Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness |
| title_short |
Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness |
| title_full |
Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness |
| title_fullStr |
Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness |
| title_sort |
art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness |
| publisher |
Інститут філософії імені Г.С. Сковороди НАН України |
| publishDate |
2011 |
| topic_facet |
Культурологія |
| url |
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/39553 |
| citation_txt |
Art – aesthetic and critical potential of innovativeness / A. Pastuszek // Світогляд - Філософія - Релігія: Зб. наук. пр. — Суми: ДВНЗ "УАБС НБУ", 2011. — № 2(2). — Бібліогр.: 8 назв. — англ. |
| series |
Світогляд - Філософія - Релігія |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT pastuszeka artaestheticandcriticalpotentialofinnovativeness |
| first_indexed |
2025-07-03T21:32:11Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-07-03T21:32:11Z |
| _version_ |
1836663000648384512 |
| fulltext |
УДК 130.2
Artur PASTUSZEK
ART – AESTHETIC AND CRITICAL POTENTIAL
OF INNOVATIVENESS
The article presents point of view on the modern art as the field for innovations of the
artists. The author critically describes main features of the modern art, investigates its
background, analyse its main techniques and finds the place of “the new” in the art.
Keywords: modern art, innovations, novelty, aesthetics.
Problem statement. For the modern man “the new” has become intriguing
not only because of expansive (and compulsive) character of cognition but also in
the context of existing aesthetization processes. It is not known if the desire for
“the new” originally contributed to the modification of aesthetic criteria, or
aesthetic perspective prejudged of innovativeness charm – what is important is
that the criterion of originality, apart from strengthening of creation of newer and
newer class of objects dynamics, has led to distancing oneself towards something
which is traditional and routine generating a critical potential of a discourse.
It has also been noticed that the alluring novelty had started to oust a banal
monument – growing dynamics of civilization changes caused that disproportion
between the innovative and original and this which is the ordinary and stereotyped
has increased. Faster and faster “getting old” of some objects, which the man is
surrounded by, has become another phenomena which is symptomatic and
assisting the chase for innovativeness. The time when they stay attractive is shorter
and shorter – as a consequence they become redundant earlier. It happens before
they stop being useful, before they become completely used and obsolete. In place
of them there appear newer objects – not necessarily more original or
unconventional – and therefore desired.
Previous research. The problem of modern art was highlighted in works of
such scholars as Barthes R., Bauman Z., Bürger P., Douglas M., Clair J., Rancierre
J., Welsch W., but still the issue of innovativeness and aesthetic in moder art was
not studied enough so it needs further and more detailed review.
The main aim of the paper is to describe critically main features of the
modern art, to investigate its background, to analyse its main techniques and to
find the place of “the new” in the art.
Main body. Innovation polarizes therefore the area of things separating what
is original from what is up-to-date and these objects which retain their value,
functionality and attractiveness from those which independently of their physical
features are becoming useless. In this way a part of objects receive the status of
unnecessary surplus, waste – and so their story comes to an end.
As a result of such dynamic changes, satisfaction which was connected with
possession of some class of objects has transformed into distress resulting from
discovering of their status’ instability – liquidity connected with not with using up
©
Artur Pastuszek, 2012
but with the change of context in which they function. The pressure of innovation
has therefore increased a discomfort of communion with these objects. This
ambivalent character of redundant things has decided about inconvenience
connected with using them.
However – which was pointed out by Mary Douglas in Purity and Danger –
not always everything which is becoming ambiguous, as a result of dynamics and
modification of use, must be repulsive or troublesome for us. The distress which is
conventionally bound with such a situation may be replaced by some kind of
aesthetic satisfaction, when related to not articulated forms [6, p. 78–79]. That kind
of objects is found in the field of reflection of new art, which has therefore found
another aesthetic niche.
Modern art seems to have a basis just on this which is ambiguous, arise
from the experience of maladjustment, disorder or original discomfort. And its
interest in the subjects pushed aside at the margin of life may bear in itself, apart
from aesthetic, also critical potential, because again it makes trouble for easily
accepted polarization of the world. At the same time, art would confirm its
innovative power – would arise from the same pressure of looking for the new (as
unconventional and attractive), which profiles modern culture. However, it would
not prejudge the status of objects, reaching for even those which have become
outdated and redundant. As a consequence, this would be make it different from other
forms of activity because such an attitude would not only oblige to constant
redefining of objects’ status but would also generate creativity and critical caution
(alertness), reaching for the background of used requisites of modern culture.
Artist, creating a work of art out of useless things, may draw from this
seemingly unattractive and barren part of the world, may bestow a form to
something that has already lost it as a result of ordering strategies. She or he is able
to extract new content out of what is redundant – in this way, he/she may make the
object of reflection out of what has been marginalised. In this sense art is a critical
activity. We can also formulate it, as Mary Douglas does, as a renewing of the
system, restoring what is ordinary and unnecessary to the ritual as well as another
change – through aesthetical frame – the status of objects out of place
11
. At the
same time exposing of “consumed” objects, unnecessary, which only express
instability and redundancy with their condition, and placing them again in the area
of significant artefacts is becoming a creative activity.
However, such a reversal must be accompanied by a new set of artistic means.
Hence, there is an increasing interest of modern artists in reaching for ready
products, modifying the existing forms, using of casual materials, mixing any
components, stratifying or combining, using the remnants, scraps and fragments.
This recycling has become, however, not only introduction of redundant objects
again in the space of culture but also polemic exhibition of instability and
conventionality of their status. In general, artists using this arsenal of new means
do not cover the original form of used objects leaving them legible, recognizable
111 One should remember that objects highly valued before, like literary texts, works of art or inventions status may also be entitled such a status.
although they are the components of other structures giving a new meaning to
them.
The sources of such artistic attitudes should be searched for in the area of
avant-garde art. Its protest, aimed at the previous reception standards and therefore
transforming critically a modernistic norm of not engaged creation and dominant
artistic and aesthetic stereotypes, was the first of symptoms of a new situation. It
concerned what was conventional and not attractive – to any canon. In this sense
violation of traditional order has become an expression of protest against fossilized
artistic conventions and also stability of social order and revealed mechanisms of
power. It was also located in the frames of postulated broadening of freedom
space.
At the same time the way in which artists perceive the surrounding world has
changed. There has been stressed the diffusion of modern life and destabilization
connected with it, liquefying which achieves the shape of late modern
ambivalence. They have already demanded consolidating and synthesizing actions.
It was originally thought that art may provide such consolidating strategy, that we
can restore in its area the lost unity of existence even if it would be realized only in
the area of imaginative performances. However, trust towards constructive power of
artistic practices has disturbed the experience of cultural consequences of such
unifying actions. After all, artistic transformation might also be perceived as violating
of things’ durability, liquefying of its status, depriving of unequivocal foundation.
Such strategy was meant to serve successive destruction of traditional image
of art and existing reception habits. It has enabled the access to not only various
ways of expression for the artists but also previously marginalized matter – mass
produced goods, forgotten texts, deserted objects have made the work of art
constructed with them a problem.
An earlier dominant tendency was, as Peter Bürger noticed, a desire to present
the whole even if it was not directly available and one could only assume its
existence on the basis of the revealed fragment. The fragment represented at the
same time the wholeness – as if announcing it. An avant-garde artist longed for
something different – uniting, compiling and collocating of extracts was leading
him/his to such a reinterpretation in which one would not find a place for the
wholeness and the meaning was associated with the part [4, p. 90]. To make such a
reinterpretation, the very matter had to be treated by an avant-garde artist in a
different way. Traditionally, the meaning was searched for in it – now the meaning
has been implanted by composing, connecting or putting source neutral elements
together.
Thereby, artistic universum has revealed fragmentation and dispersion along
with exposed episodic character of existence. It refers to fine arts as well as
literature or the culture of sound. In this way durability and stability, deeply rooted in
modern discourses, have been displaced. Up till now durability of things
surrounding the man has guaranteed constancy and stability of the world. Modern
culture directed towards attractiveness of novelty and episodic character of
presence has disturbed this apparent balance.
Such liquefying, destabilization and as a consequence confusion forced to look
for new and more reliable tools of regulation in order to regain power over
resistant matter of the world, re-ordering and capturing of the lost territory. It
extorted the increase of inner mechanisms of control and led to much clear
pressure of ordering of life space, achieving a repressive character. At the same
time technological development, appearance of new tools and common access to
them have determined the quality of participation in culture.
Although these processes have largely been connected with the flow of
information, they also influenced the change of art perception’s model and
significant transformation of modern artistic reality. Technological progress has also
been correlated with artistic workshop and results in constituting of a new creative
attitude as well as receiving one being a symptom of deeper changes in
anthropological sphere. The ability to use new communication and processing devices
has become indispensable in active participation in culture. It was to be accompanied
by the knowledge concerning functioning of these devices and possibilities and
ways of its use. Creative use of these new means has largely resolved to processing
of the content, processing of available elements and also edition, which in artistic
space means using of technical apparatus used to record, reproduction and
distribution both of the pictures and words and sounds.
Art is undergoing a metamorphosis similar to that of a whole social space but
all tensions, dilemmas, controversies in its area gain a special – as it is aesthetically
framed – attitude. Simultaneously, it has to be noticed that the very way of
perceiving of art has changed. For the activities described, the work of art’s status has
changed, as well as position of the artist and as a result of aesthetic and artistic
modifications – the situation of the recipient.
The aesthetics of creative assimilation and processing, which has been
constituted at a new position of both creator and preceptor required therefore a
new look at the role of the artist and “consumer” of art. Changed, traditionally
leading role of the creator and an author of the work of art, until now superior to a
passive recipient, had to be redefined because of an active character of the latter.
He/she has become an equal participant of culture and aesthetic reproduction.
Mastering of new technologies and common access to them along with
broadening of media repertoire have not only multiplied the potential of artists but
also gave the recipients a possibility of active participation in culture, increasing
their creative opportunities, allowing for a critical reference, their own comment and
statement. Therefore in the range of competences of modern culture participant there
are orientation and selection, the need of a critical approach to the received contents
– creation, however, similarly to any cultural activity, has become an establishing of
significant order. In this way evoking, referring or copying have been assimilated as
tactics of appropriation and reorganization of this territory.
As I have already pointed out modern artistic strategies, which are largely
based on processing, have been elaborated by modern authors. They were
originally aimed against academic understanding of art. An avant-garde artist was
more of an experimenter, constructor than an inspired creator, and his art, radical
in form, was to perform important social tasks. The artist has elaborated a new
form of unlimited work of art, based on a novelty which is abolishing and
reinterpreting the canon, which was looking for its originality in reconstruction. This
form was contrasted with modernistic and organic work of art which – as Peter
Bürger noticed [4, p. 92] – camouflaged the source of creation trying to suggest some
universal order with its totality.
The idea of unlimited work of art was a consequence of appearing of new
avant-garde means of expression, inspired by science, civilization and
technological progress. It helped to redirect the attention, exposing the elements
which were ignored until now. Hence, using the fragment of the work of art
already functioning in the artistic circle as a matter of new creation has been
considered as original artistic strategy.
Nowadays, there is no indignation at realizations which base on borrowing
and processing of elements extracted from the world of art, and compounded on
the rule of assembling and compiling of a selected parts. They may originate from
the area of so called high culture as well as from this degraded class of objects
meaning “hollow”, which constitute common things or redundant ones. Work of art
created in such a way may have a revitalizing character – serve as a refreshment,
reminder of old contents, themes, motifs, forms, styles, works.
One can use this strategy as a form of reinterpretation – then new qualities are
created, previous forms gain new contexts, new arrangements which often take on
rebellious character in relation to the original meaning. This recontextualization
brings critical content which might be helpful to overcome the borders, leaving
tradition and conventional way of thinking.
A radical form of such artistic practices is “provocative” reduction of source
content – this way of processing in which the prototype, original undergoes its
effacing. In this case not only aesthetic but also ethical or even formal and legal
status of such realizations is becoming problematic.
However, modern culture has established such a model of life in which
manipulating which demonstrates its creative power in assembling and constructing,
has drawn our attention, in a tricky way, from pejorative meaning combined with
this notion. What is more, its aesthetic dimension has received a common approval,
confirming, at the same time, some social valorization. In this way operational sense
hiding behind this notion has somehow reduced its psychological or also social and
technical context – any political or ethical consequences have been reduced to
pragmatic sphere of expected profits, while manual aspect (dexterity, ability to
use tools and efficiency) have neutralized suspicions of persuasion, misleading,
indoctrination. Therefore, attractiveness of innovation has covered this ethical or
political dimension.
Only deconstructing of original context of manipulation has started revealing
critical potential of artistic manifestation. They were uncovered as manipulative
procedures of cultural output’s reproduction and phenomena serving dynamic
multiplication and enriching of social life space. At the same time these
technologically mediated artistic strategies have become an effective way of
accustoming of hybrydic nature of cultural reality. They have enabled filtering and
selecting of meanings.
This common manipulative tendency to construct and compose a new order,
placing itself not only in the area of artistic practices, is also accompanied by
decomposing, having a subversive potential, introducing the elements behind its
context in the area of ordered form, and which is incoherent, incongruous disturbing
the inner order. However, one can understand these attempts of destabilization also
as a specific aesthetic test in which redundant, chaotic or accidental things are to make
a recipient of refined modern art and literature sensitive again or to sublimate his/her
taste. One can – as by Jean Clair [5, p. 32–33] – describe these practices as nearly
homeopathic anaesthetic therapy, anesthetizing at what is unattractive, tasteless, or
simply repulsive. Then, things which in social space would reveal the need of order
by exposing incoherent redundant elements would correlate with aesthetic desire
for attractiveness and satisfaction.
Art and literature would be in such a comfortable situation that their
imaginative – or as by Jacques Rancière, “phantasmagoric” [7, p. 98–99] – power
would enable to isolate the chosen fragments of reality and modify established
hierarchies. However, it has nothing to do with illusiveness but rather a specific
distance and aesthetic framing which is enabled by artistic practice, exposing at the
same time and critically transforming reality. One can also, referring to Roland
Barthes’s suggestion [1, p. 12–13], appoint “two edges” for a modern work of art –
the first one: learned, reproductive, reaching for the canon and the second one:
rebellious, destructive and liquefied, abolishing any ready pattern.
Hence, such a work of art would be placed between indicated borders
(“edges”), ensuring a pleasure of communing with them. However, the
affirmative pleasure would be opposed to subversive delight, which would be placed
not on the side of dialectics of repetition and rupture but opposing the old to the
new, ousting of sentiment for past achievements and desire for an absolute
innovativeness
22
. Therefore the new would be an escape from stereotype and
repetitiveness of the language of power [1, p. 58–60], from the pleasure to repressed
delight. As Barthes points out, repetitiveness deprives things from charm (magic) and
that is why the power of delight is combined with the novelty and the rule of
modification.
Yet, does any repetition annihilate magic aura shrouding originally the world
of objects? However, on the other hand, all artistic strategies referring to assembling
of the work of art out of ready made fragments, evoking past contexts, revealing
hidden dependencies which resemble some magic practices. The same analogy is
also pointed out by Jean Clair, when he notices the traces of original magic in
compiling works of art out of remnants, scraps, mana which would serve to again
submit resistant reality [5, p. 48–49]. In this way magic could help to recreate a
222 One can refer to the category jouissance, introduced by Jean Lacan, which originally described delight of erotic nature and which was spread to all satisfaction submitting
to desire and allowing for individual not entangle in the space of the other , manifesting of me. Then jouissance would rather be a radical affirmation of individual. life in its
imperfection. It would also be life’s disturbance, emphasis of its incoherence, while pleasure constitutes the attempt of its synthetic remedial unification.
pleasant thread linking the scattered world in one unit, as it would possess the
power of synthesis.
Conclusions. Thus, the new does not necessarily possess this rebellious,
abolishing character – it may be created also by the repetition of what is obsolete.
Especially in the world which exhausts the potential of originality so fast,
innovation may take on the form of evoking (repeating), recontextualization or
“recalibrating” (change of perspective). These ways are the result of modern artistic
practices which again made interesting both what had seemed banal up till now, and
necessary what had been qualified as redundant, and satisfaction has been already
found at the level of fragment leaving the ambition of a total approach.
References
1. Barthes R. Przyjemność tekstu / transl. A Lewańska / R.Barthes. – Warszawa :
Wydawnictwo KR, 1997. – Р. 12–60.
2. Bauman Z. Życie na przemiał / transl. T. Kunz / Z. Bauman. – Kraków : Wydawnictwo
Literackie, 2006.
3. Bauman Z. Płynna nowoczesność, transl. T. Kunz / Z. Bauman. – Kraków : Wydawnictwo
Literackie, 2006.
4. Bürger P. Teoria awangardy / transl. J. Kita-Huber / P. Bürger. – Kraków : TAiWPN
Universitas, 2006. – Р. 90–92.
5. Clair J. De Immundo / transl. M. Ochab / J. Clair. – Gdańsk : słowo / obraz terytoria, 2007. – Р.
32–33.
6. Douglas M. Czystość i zmaza / transl. M. Bucholc / M. Douglas. – Warszawa :
Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy, 2007. – Р. 78–79.
7. Rancierre J. Dzielenie postrzegalnego. Estetyka i polityka / transl. J. Sowa ; J. Rancierre.
– Kraków : Korporacja Ha!art, 2007. – Р. 98–99.
8. Welsch W. Estetyka poza estetyką. O nową postać estetyki / transl. K. Guczalska /
W. Welsch. – Kraków : TAiWPN Universitas, 2005.
Отримано 01.02.2012
Анотація
Пастушек Артур. Мистецтво – естетичний і критичний потенціал
інноваційності.
У статті презентується погляд на сучасне мистецтво як поле для
інновацій митців. Автор критично описує головні риси сучасного мистецтва,
досліджує передумови його виникнення, аналізує його головні прийоми та
знаходить місце “нового” в мистецтві.
Ключові слова: сучасне мистецтво, інновації, новинки, естетика.
|