Logic of Postmodern Art and the Deconstruction of Reason - Part One Postmodernism which is self criticism of modernity and cultural philosophy of capitalism owed much to Marxism to defy Marxism itself. I have already written one article on Deluge and tried to establish the fact that Postmodernism has nothing to do with people but to work for the interest of capitalism. It does not assault on capitalism but provide logic to it that how it can evolve itself more structured and more cleverly that it could encapsulate the revolutionary intelligence in its fold. And it can be seen in the postmodernist philosophy and art. Postmodern aesthetics does not assault on capitalism but provides it the clues of exploitation and makes it aware of the coming dangers. An artist investigates violence in his or her media just to show that it can be harmful to the system in which art is an aspect that plays a role. It does not assault on the system that is responsible for the violence. Postmodern art deceives the consciousness of art, its truthfulness and responsibility to the people. Art is irresponsible say postmodernists. Irresponsibility is derivative of autonomous and self promotion and is being regarded as necessary evil for the progress. This all goes against people at large; it's a culture of dominance and deceiving. Culture in which people are no where, culture which is a tool for hegemonia claims itself progressive! The Monopolistic hold on culture, which forbids anything that can not be grasped, necessarily refers us back to what has already been produced in the past claims itself progressive? Its progressiveness is so wide that it retains everything non-progressive from the past. Postmodernists reject every art form that seeks any truth beyond the relational truth of living world without thinking that it is because of that one progresses. In arts it was applied and propagated. Suddenly great modernists became non-progressives because they don't contribute in the capitalist exploitation mechanism. So some other art form was needed that could be usable as well as inspirational. Video art has all this because it uses all the possible media in creating expressiveness; expressiveness is what is needed. Video art that is being spread and propagated as postmodern does nothing but dilutes reality in a certain time frame. Fredric Jameson says, "Video is temporal art, the most paradoxical appropriation of subjectivity (subjectivity that wants freedom from obligations) are observable in the experience of time itself." As fiction was invented by modern bourgeois to propagate their comfort philosophy of life and to dilute the real life problems so as video; there is very little difference in both. Like fiction novels in video too there is fictitious element that sublimates something and dilutes something, for which it has come into existence. Jameson says, " fiction is what is in question here and it can be defined essentially as the construction of just such fictive and foreshortened temporalities which are then substituted for real time we are thereby enabled momentarily to forget?" Then there comes the validity of narrative encapsulating which it tries to capture reality in fictive mode and translates it into a subjective experience. This narrative was always in work against people as Marx has identified and prophesized about its demise by itself (its non- progressiveness amidst all its progressive talks). This is Marx who had identified it first and tried to counter it with his dialectical materialism. He emphasized on the deconstruction of its ideology which has nothing humanitarian in true sense of the word. He himself blew German ideology which was at that time ideology of ruling class. Therefore, Narrative has to be understood because it's an art that captures human freedom in a frame then exploits it for the greater benefit of the exploiters. Deleuze's philosophy contains this kind of trickery since he meters everything sublime from the angle of usability. Thus Expression the most sublime aspect of humans becomes trickery and subject to be exploited in evolution of capitalist mechanism. Adorno in his book "culture industry" has demolished these kinds of exploitative aesthetics and philosophy which is based on a pleasure principle that is always a flight from the 'last remaining thought of resistance'. Pleasure always means not to think about anything, to forget suffering even when it is shown. Postmodernism too could not transcend it because by rejecting experience of pleasure in absolute sense it puts it in a spatial presence beyond past history and future destiny. Deleuze calls it schizophrenic experience (Heroic experience) which is very close to Nietzschean concept of eternal return. Postmodern art follows this aesthetics and tries to create this aesthetic experience through documentary films, Video art, installation art, etc. Nothing has been changed except positioning. This positioning of already existent and invented truth in a new frame is interpreted as progressive and new but in reality progress has not been made. Postmodern art is political - aesthetical because it follows materialist aesthetics in which sublime is considered from usability point of view. Almost every postmodern art has one element that is to show its usability. Paintings are made for advertisement industry; video art is made for film and TV industry. From aesthetic point of view it shows its usefulness and very much sponsored by industries. It has nothing aesthetical and sublime; a value which has been considered profane and sacred to artist. Ammanuel Levinas attacks it very strongly and it must be attacked because for it everything is a commodity kind of thing in which there is a possibility to create capital. Bill Henson an Australian photographer artist by photographing child's nude bodies and by recreating a fake child porn atmosphere as a subject for his photography has shown us how far postmodern art can go. It has to do business this is all concern of post modern art. There are some galleries and artists involved in creating this kind of business environment in the name of creativity and expression. if we consider it as a form of the age we would say that the visual language of postmodern art does not transcend Surrealism rather it's a return of surrealism; an art form and aesthetic which was already rejected by great artists and aestheticians and philosophers of the west. Walter Benjamin declared it bourgeois poetic politics he wrote "for what is the program of the bourgeois parties? A bad poem on spring time, filled to bursting with metaphors. The socialist sees that 'finer future of our children and grandchildren" in a society in which all act 'as if they were angels' and anyone has as much 'as if he were rich' and every one lives 'as if he were free'. Of angels, wealth, freedom, not a trace- these are mere images. And stock imagery of these social-democratic associations?". By this mockingly written lines Benjamin shatters these social-democratic thieves poetic politics. Benjamin and after him Adorno have shown us that how surrealism tried to dilute the real issues of life through their poetic phantasm. History of art has shown us that how the great painter Salvador Dali became dollar Dali by selling his spirit and concern to millionaire ladies. Postmodern art can be distinguished from surrealism from only one point of view that it goes beyond textual and subjective and tries to form a visual culture in which every possible form is embedded. In this visual culture visual overpowers content and becomes content itself. Its rejection of sublime of modernist art in which theory held it from behind and linking of it to the current production mechanism thus becoming the part and parcel of industrial production shows how far it can go. In postmodern art aesthetics has loosed its autonomy. It is a death of art; because it has diluted freedom and the spirit of art. In postmodern time image has become a commodity hence to expect a negation of commodity production from it is vain. It's a falsity to claim it a democratic art form; it has nothing democratic. Fredric Jameson comments that "all beauty today is meretricious and the appeal to it by contemporary pseudo- aestheticism is an ideological manoeuvre and not a creative resource." At least in modernism art was saved from commodification and in it a certain freedom was enjoyed and at certain extent truth was sought after. Postmodern art that is being declared a cultural propaganda of capitalism is nothing else then a project set forth to capture and humiliate the humanity. Antonio Negry's logic that in postmodern modern era society would not be ruled and controlled with law and enforcement agencies but by controlling of human's biological instincts is just one example of postmodern anti-humanistic thought. The logic behind the rejection of reason can be traced in it. Author is an art critic and writer of three books ' contemporizing Buddha', ' Hindu Tantra Yoga' and 'Concerning The Spiritual In Art-an Indian modern art perspective'. He has been awarded with 'Lalit kala Academy Scholarship Award' for art criticism in 2005. Currently working on a book 'Buddhist tantra yoga'. He lives and works in Delhi India.
Pages to are hidden for
"Logic of Postmodern Art and the Deconstruction of Reason - Part One"Please download to view full document