Theoretical Disengagement III

Artists are always judged and categorized by their first public efforts. Most underfunded artists do not have the capital to invest in the production side of their work, and must rely on their own skills in order to create and fabricate it. Depending on the level of skill of the individual these first public steps are the beginnings of a "personal style." Without any corporate budgetary excesses what you are getting is the unfettered artist - the beginnings of an autuer - or that is the narrative. The autuer must make do with what is available and affordable in order to manifest a production. In the art industry lack of capital or venture investment can and does confer a certain handmade heft and value to the production of the work. And it is the handmade nature of the work that defines the perception of autheticity regarding the artist.

For critics, collectors and gallerists the twin barrels of youth and “newness” are aimed squarely between the eyes of every critical investigation - or better - the recognition of style. This is the pure artist at work. The artist relying on their own skills in order to create a physical manifestation of their ideas. Loaded with the ammunition of a biographical backstory, usually viewed as brashness, spareness, and economy, the critical implications of youth are that the artist / auteur is both authentic and noncorporate - outside the system because they are outside capital. Like a vast reserve of oil beneath the desert sands they are an untapped natural resource. As a “new” artist the economy of the production of the work is part of the experience of its authenticity. This handmade production confers a certain theoretical weight to what you may be looking at because it is tied to the physical abilities of the artist. For most, the ideas of youth and lack of venture capital create this illusion of raw style, of newness, of potential, and mostly authenticity. And for the auteur the story behind the production of these works is what is being sold to the viewing public - more so than the actual work. The accompanying narrative insures that the work is the real deal because it hasn't been paid for, it hasn't been tapped, and it comes from lived experience.

In the film industry a 3 million dollar film that grosses 20 million dollars is a huge hit, and the auteur will be guaranteed a bigger production, a bigger budget for his next film. In the art world it is similar. The artist who manages a sell out a first show (either at the fair or in the gallery) and get publicity (of any kind) at an entry level gallery is guaranteed collectors' further interest and perhaps a larger venue from the more upscale galleries and collectors. We hear so much about the youth factor in collecting new work. Ideas of "Youth" and the "New" are both connected by coded narratives that bolster the appreciation and salability of the work. And these narratives usually have to do with outre lifestyles, rough stories of banal existence, drugs, danger, death and sex. Narratives are the insurance factors that exist outside and beyond the value of the work itself, and deal with the legend of the artist - the work is merely a token of that narrative - an illustration of the story of the artist. It is this backstory of the autuer that is fascinating, and usually, their first projects retell and mythologize that backstory. Later the "youthful" narrative will become the problem that must be overcome.

Once the indie auteur has access to a larger budget the weaknesses of their intellectual theoretical involvement and physical artistic abilities can become apparent fairly quickly. With the growth of budget comes the inevitable upscaling of production - this is called ambition. Painters are required to become better painters and sculptors better sculptors etc etc. Ambition requires a leap in skill by the artist / autuer. However the cobbled together nature of their original enterprises and the backstories surrounding these works were the original enticement to the buying public - not the content nor the physicality of the piece itself. The raw production values enhanced by the narrative actually are the intended art piece. (A good example of this idea of narrative and production can be seen in the recent discussions of Tracy Emin's lackluster paintings and drawings in the British Pavillion in the Venice Biennale. She had for years been making installations of a specific handmade nature tied to her lifestyle excesses and for the Biennale decided to create a more traditional painting and drawing exhibition based on her backstory.) Our aesthetic expectations in front of new artists’ works have come to rely on this “economy” - in today’s art world it is visually coded and presented through slapdash paint handling - crap found materials - familiar visual ideas - faux naive drawing - and elaborate undefined narratives. Artistic reality is continually re-presented by this spareness and nakedness - artists strip down, go back to basics (“getting real”) and economize. These ideas become the driving claim to poetic depth in the work. We equate seriousness and realness with economy. Similarly we hear about a corporation’s stock that is not doing well in the markets - they make cutbacks - trim the fat - which means they are getting serious about increasing the value of their real product - their stock. IN the artworld the real product being sold are the autuers themselves . This view of economic reality is always tied to production and it's seen through industry, thrift, value, seriousness, and ultimately, success. For the indie auteurs managing the economics of the backstory is the ultimate work and pathway to a more successful public career.

A further conundrum to this success is the autuer's ability to satisfy the demand for product while maintaining authenticity. As an autuer becomes more known the production of art objects must be ramped up. In order to do that a certain standardization of form must take place. Most artists / autuers these days outsource their work. This is actually cheaper than keeping a large studio full of employees. And it has become the norm as a few production companies now make many different artists work. "...ARTISTS have relied on the aid of apprentices, artisans and studio assistants for centuries. Raphael, Titian, Rubens and Rembrandt all presided over busy workshops where apprentices churned out paintings to which the master would add finishing touches — and his signature. What has changed is the expectation that artists actually possess the skills to produce their own work." The point is that with outsourced production the standardization of style is now a key factor in extending the autuer's economic viability and career. The backstory accompanying the style must be managed during this difficult transition from autuer to ceo. And it is done through media. Damian Hirst's career is an effective example - going from rough art school entreprenuer, to provacatuer, to rehab-bound slider, to rejuvenated CEO of Hirst Inc to the tune of 130 million dollars net worth.Hirst has documented every aspect of his career using techniques developed by his first collector Charles Saatchi.

In art today the look of the handmade is the preferred indie auteur trope (a rough type of drawing - a scrawled line - a careless impasto - graffiti from the street - prefabricated found objects - refabricated found objects.) This sort of handmade "reality" has now gone across the boards in all the arts - music, video, movies - without any discernable appreciation as to its fuller meaning. The indie auteur feels that “reality” is ultimately uplifted as art through the delivery systems - galleries, theatres, art fairs, museums, etc. (A photographic depiction of a blow job can seem like art when it’s hung on gallery walls - regardless of its author's intention.) The autuer's style has to be codified into the mass production of art objects. IN essence once the style has been coded work can progress without the autuer - this is called branding (we shall speak more of this later.) Additionally, the importance of the delivery system is defined by the calculated programming of the venues themselves (galleries, art fairs, museums etc), which can not, will not, and do not differentiate the content. It cleans it up, it packages it for consumption and provides a venue for the marketing of saleable objects. The delivery system is designed to transform any content into a diversion - making the content familiar and acceptable - or more commonly - an entertainment product to be consumed. We no longer are confronted or challenged by ideas - instead we are entertained by them once they are packaged by the delivery systems. This concept of entertainment is the great leveling force in all of this marketability. It creates an illusion of safety by distancing the content of the work presented from any implication as to its deeper meaning. Jeff Koons’ porn pictures of the early 90s used all the visual tropes of the porn industry. The critical establishment around these paintings still maintains that they are not pornography. Why? Other than the fact that they are shown in a gallery and made by a “famous” artist - what is the difference, and more importantly, why should we differentiate? The autuers' discussion will always be on the production values in creating the piece, not on the theoretics behind the presentation of the blow job - one is tied to the backstory, the other tied to ideas. Jeff maintains these paintings are about innocence and love, and I have no doubt that is ALL they are about. Anything deeper, and they would devolve into their content, becoming calculated and specific destroying the backstory that creates the value of the work. Entertainment creates a nebulous sort of safety, a kind of cushion for consumption. The auteur must maintain the tropes of this defined reality in order to titillate, to create a stir, to create heat for consumption all the while maintaining the simplicity and innocence of the original backstory. These ingredients must mix in the minds of the viewing audience in order to re-create the distance required for saleable entertainment.

part IV to come....