In the opening of Das Kapital, Marx makes the observation that within the capitalist mode of production we evaluate materials not by what purpose they serve or what they're actually useful for, but we instead recognize them based on their value in the market.
I have now made several of these concept pots/objects. I viewed them as art for sure, a kind of three dimensional poetry, so got quite miffed when an art teacher friend of mine said "Oh, are they tulip bowls?", the inference being that I had made them for no other ends than to hold flowers. Now, not only is that an affront, but I cant possibly see why something so ugly and visceral could be seen to contain beautiful flowers. She went on to explain that tulip bowls were very ornate and became a whole phenomenon of their own, because of the love of tulips and the obsession that Europe had with them, owning and showing off new varieties of both plant and plant holder. The flower itself was such a rare and sought after commodity that it had become something of a status symbol, so by extension the tulip bowl had also become a wanted and prized item.
I pondered over this a while, and for some time still smarted at the thought that I was a mere artisan, and not a fine artist, simply throwing out mindless empty vessels that most people assumed would have to be filled. Incomplete objects, primitive ones, products off an assembly line to be used and abused. Not items to be looked into in any great detail, not items worthy of a back story or a theory.
However, with art being a commodity, and this not being particular to Post Modern times, twas always thus since Renaissance times and before where the rich would commission or collect, I reasoned with myself that an artisan product was nothing to be ashamed of, and that it was a democratised object. It had Usefulness, because it was Crafted, and was not a Commodity because it was Art. It had some function so therefore it could not be evaluated purely on its artistic quality and therefore monetised as so valuable and rare an object. I shy away from associating myself from Socialism but there it was, an object of mud, almost Arte Povera but as common as a chipped mug; and since I dont sell paintings and tend to work with community arts groups for a pittance, it seems I have fallen into socialism without even trying!
It would be nice to command a high price for an object that I have not only made with my hands but made with my intellect, and be revered and sought after and my work grace the coolest gallery walls and plinths, but in a world so twisted that even staple foodstuff like wheat and corn are traded as commodities, do I really want to fuel a market and become part of this vampiric overblown captalism? At a time where "We are the 99" rallies are popping up all over the place, should I really be yearning to be part of a system that now seems very old hat and rotten by an ever increasing number of ordinary people?
But deep down, Commodity vs Usefulness is not an arguement. Its what I can make that comes from the heart that matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment