This work is licensed under a Creative Commons (Attribution: 3.0) License (US), though the work this blog incorporates may be separately licensed.
A Search for Comity in the Intellectual Property Wars: symposium at The New York Institute for the Humanities at NYU, April 28-30, 2006 [slides, audio, transcripts]
download the report [PDF]
Special Issue on the French philosopher of technology and political activist Bernard Stiegler, guest edited by Patrick Crogan.
Bernard Stiegler: Philosophy, Technics, And Activism
Patrick Crogan on the principal theoretical coordinates of Stiegler’s philosophy of technology and its relevance for critical explorations between culture and the political.
Knowledge, Care, and Trans-Individuation: An Interview with Bernard Stiegler
Patrick Crogan probes the cultural and political dimensions of Bernard Stiegler’s enterprise, including his conceptualization of contemporary social and cultural, political and environmental crises.
Telecracy Against Democracy
Bernard Stiegler critically reflects on what he terms ‘telecracy’ or the ruination of democracy and citizenship by the short-circuiting of the normal mechanisms of politics by way of television and the wider televisual program industries.
Technology and Politics: A Response to Bernard Stiegler
Richard Beardsworth considers Stiegler’s contribution to contemporary critical theory as a singular understanding of technology indebted to the Marxist analysis of capitalism and Freudian libidinal economy.
Song of Russia [LINK to full content]
Yevgeniy Fiks' ‘Song of Russia’, is a series of paintings based on imagery borrowed from what Stiegler calls the ‘program industries’ or, in this case, three sympathetic Hollywood films about Russia that were produced at the behest of President Franklin D Roosevelt between 1943 and 1944, inclusive of North Star, Song of Russia, and Mission to Moscow.
Bernard Stiegler and the Time of Technics
Ian James examines Stiegler’s thinking about technics as developed in his Technics and Time trilogy, his relationship to Francis Fukuyama’s ideas on technology, history, and progress, as well to a number of other contemporary critical theorists such as Paul Virilio.
The Limits of Human Progress: A Critical Study
Gilbert Simondon looks at human progress and production, language and religion in relation to technical progress after the Renaissance. Are people agents or subjects of development or both and what are the implications for the industrial system?
What New Humanism Today?
Jean-Hugues Barthelemy argues for a reading of humanism and Enlightenment that strips them of their scientistic and Eurocentric implications and makes the values of both available for contemporary appropriation by way of Simondon, Marx, and Heidegger.
Kant Avec Ferry: Some Thoughts on Bernard Stiegler’s Prendre Soin: I. De La Jeunesse et des Generations
Chris Turner on Stiegler’s understanding of the import of the neoliberal turn, the barbarism of the market, and the psychopower of the program industries as individuals are targeted merely as consumers.
About Cultural Politics
“Cultural Politics is a welcome and innovative addition. In an academic universe already well populated with journals, it is carving out its own unique place—broad and a bit quirky. It likes to leap between the theoretical and the concrete, so that it is never boring and often filled with illuminating glimpses into the intellectual and cultural worlds.” -- Lawrence Grossberg, University of North Carolina, USA.
John Armitage, Northumbria University, UK; Ryan Bishop, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Douglas Kellner, University of California, Los Angeles, USACultural Politics is an international, refereed journal that explores the global character and effects of contemporary culture and politics. It analyzes how cultural identities, agencies and actors, political issues and conflicts, and global media are linked, characterized, examined and resolved. In doing so, the journal explores precisely what is cultural about politics and what is political about culture. It investigates the marginalized and outer regions of this complex and interdisciplinary subject area. Each issue publishes artwork by selected artists reflecting contemporary cultural and political issues.
NOW OUT IN PRINT
Cultural PoliticsVolume 6, Issue 1
Read full content on Cultural Politics’ Artists’ website:
John Armitage, Northumbria University, UK; Ryan Bishop, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Douglas Kellner, University of California, Los Angeles, USA
ANNOUNCING the book signing and release party for David Humphrey’s long-awaited anthology of art writing, Blind Handshake, with introductions by Alexi Worth and Chris Kraus.
530 West 22nd Street
New York, NY
WHEN:Wednesday, December 16th, 6 – 8 PM
Short reading at 7
The art criticism of the painter David Humphrey merits an anthology. But neither Humphrey nor Periscope wanted to present his writing as archival documents from 1990 to 2008. We decided it would be more innovative to treat the texts as the starting point for a book that acknowledges and extends the connections between Humphrey s studio practice and his criticism. The outcome is Blind Handshake. It foregrounds the social life surrounding contemporary art the practices and gestures, the dialogues and monologues that determine its place in the world. Organized thematically, the book considers Coupling Dramas, Unknowable Others, Collective Solitudes, Prosthetic Selves, and Good Liars. Artists drawn into the action include Richard Prince, Chris Ofili, Lucien Freud, Mamma Anderson, Tony Oursler, John Currin, Mary Heilmann, Catherine Murphy, and Amy Sillman. The book's designer Geoff Kaplan employed aspects of graphic novels, magazine layouts, and art monographs in translating the writing and illustrations into a mutant creature. Introductions by Chris Kraus and Alexi Worth provide contexts for understanding the book s presentation of the turbulent intersubjectivity that pervades contemporary art.
DAVID HUMPHREY has exhibited his art throughout the United States and curated several shows in New York City. He is a recipient of the Rome Prize and a Senior Critic at the Yale School of Art. His art criticism has appeared in Art in America, Art issues, among other publications.
GEOFF KAPLAN of General Working Group is a graphic designer who teaches at the California College of the Arts. He is currently writing and designing Power of the People: The Graphic Design of the Radical Press and the Rise of the Counter Culture, 1964-1974.
ALEXI WORTH is an artist and a critic published in Artforum and the New York TImes. His art has been featured at the Elizabeth Harris Gallery and P.P.O.W., both in New York City.
CHRIS KRAUS is a writer and filmmaker. Her publications include I Love Dick, Torpor, and Video Green. She founded Native Agents, an imprint of Semiotext(e), to publish work dealing with theories of subjectivity. In 2008, she was the recipient of the Frank Jewett Mather award in art criticism from the College Art Association.
via Artnet [excerpts]:
by Grant Mandarino
Not to be outdone, Artforum this month [November] includes a review of Arthur Danto’s new book on Warhol, penned by Daniel Birnbaum, fresh from his summer job in Venice. Danto has been trying to strip Marcel Duchamp of his mantle for years and crown Warhol as the progenitor of all things postmodern. The German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, beloved of Danto, once referred to the emperor Napoleon as the "world soul on horseback" because of the way he embodied the zeitgeist of his era, and if Danto has his way, we would recognize the frazzled Warhol as a "world soul" in his own right, sans horse.
Warhol embraced the values of ordinary people, Danto claims, while Duchamp mocked them from the outside. Warhol was inclusive rather than subversive. Birnbaum suggests that Danto is rather too taken with his idol, practically elevating him to sainthood. Apparently the Brillo Box is compared at one point to the Holy Grail -- which is quite apt, at least in the sense that there have been many bogus grails, too.
More, more, more, the mag ain’t thick for nothing.[...]
Last month Artforum featured excerpts from the new book by anti-globalization gurus Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri. In his opening editorial this month, Tim Griffin revisits the question, in response to some negative feedback he received on that particular editorial decision, specifically with regard to the fact that Hardt and Negri’s enthusiasm for contemporary art is misplaced. The ruling ethos of today’s art world, or so someone wrote to Griffin, can be summed up as: "Theory is bad, political thought in art is wrong, activism is jejune, the free market is good, individualism is great, the amoral artist is genius."
Griffin claims that Hardt and Negri nevertheless prod the art world to revisit itself with the future in mind and indulge in some fanciful imagining. In Hardt and Negri’s view, thinking in the abstract is often more important than dealing with the crude, materialistic realities of the everyday world. In a long essay responding to this argument as laid out in their new book Commonwealth, David Harvey, a radical geographer who teaches at the City University of New York, calls bullshit, bless him.
"Far too many of Hardt and Negri’s proposals remain locked. . . in the realm of immaterial abstraction," Harvey writes, "and, unfortunately, never acquire concrete form." Fast on his way to becoming the pre-eminent Marxist of his generation, Harvey is a theorist who has both feet on the ground. He accuses Hardt and Negri of overlooking the importance of class-based identity and the immiserating machinations of global capitalism. At the same time, Harvey graciously commends Hardt and Negri for highlighting aspects of our contemporary situation others generally overlook.
Harvey’s response is dense, and long -- so long that part of it is relegated to that netherworld at the back of the issue, beyond the reviews. Hardt and Negri’s reply is, thankfully, shorter, and touches briefly on Harvey’s most striking critiques. Overall, you get the sense from both pieces that hidden beneath all the accommodating prose are strong disagreements that would come out in a public debate, but are smoothed over for the glossy page. Still, it is nice to see these impenetrable know-it-alls forced to admit they haven’t got it all figured out: "in some areas in which, as a geographer, he has great expertise. . . he points in directions our arguments could be extended," H&N say of Harvey’s essay.
Props to Griffin for putting this kind of material into an art magazine -- it is almost like reading old issues of Artforum from the ‘70s.
Speaking of the ‘70s Artforum, perhaps the juiciest text actually comes in the letters page, almost lost between all those ads, where venerable critics Annette Michelson and Rosalind Krauss tell their side of their 1974 departure from the Artforum editorial board to form the art theory journal October. It was, they say, not the result of their disapproval of the famous naked-Lynda Benglis-with-a-dildo ad, as the tale is usually told, but because of the sense of "invasion of editorial policy by commercial fiat" (which is why, they note, October has neither ads nor pictures). Their letter, they say, was inspired by a Roberta Smith review of the "Lynda Benglis/Robert Morris, 1973-74" show at Susan Inglett Gallery. "Since the New York Times has declined to print our letter addressing the inaccuracy, we now turn to the publication where Benglis’s advertisement first appeared in order to set the record, distorted by Smith, straight."* * *