January 14th, 2011 / 9:36 am
Random

“Fifteen Theses on Contemporary Art” by Alain Badiou

1. Art is not the sublime descent of the infinite into the finite abjection of the body and sexuality. It is the production of an infinite subjective series through the finite means of a material subtraction.

2. Art cannot merely be the expression of a particularity (be it ethnic or personal). Art is the impersonal production of a truth that is addressed to everyone.

3. Art is the process of a truth, and this truth is always the truth of the sensible or sensual, the sensible as sensible. This means : the transformation of the sensible into a happening of the Idea.

4. There is necessarily a plurality of arts, and however we may imagine the ways in which the arts might intersect there is no imaginable way of totalizing this plurality.

5. Every art develops from an impure form, and the progressive purification of this impurity shapes the history both of a particular artistic truth and of its exhaustion.

6. The subject of an artistic truth is the set of the works which compose it.

7. This composition is an infinite configuration, which, in our own contemporary artistic context, is a generic totality.

8. The real of art is ideal impurity conceived through the immanent process of its purification. In other words, the raw material of art is determined by the contingent inception of a form. Art is the secondary formalization of the advent of a hitherto formless form.

9. The only maxim of contemporary art is not to be imperial. This also means: it does not have to be democratic, if democracy implies conformity with the imperial idea of political liberty.

10. Non-imperial art is necessarily abstract art, in this sense : it abstracts itself from all particularity, and formalizes this gesture of abstraction.

11. The abstraction of non-imperial art is not concerned with any particular public or audience. Non-imperial art is related to a kind of aristocratic-proletarian ethic : Alone, it does what it says, without distinguishing between kinds of people.

12. Non-imperial art must be as rigorous as a mathematical demonstration, as surprising as an ambush in the night, and as elevated as a star.

13. Today art can only be made from the starting point of that which, as far as Empire is concerned, doesn’t exist. Through its abstraction, art renders this inexistence visible. This is what governs the formal principle of every art : the effort to render visible to everyone that which for Empire (and so by extension for everyone, though from a different point of view), doesn’t exist.

14. Since it is sure of its ability to control the entire domain of the visible and the audible via the laws governing commercial circulation and democratic communication, Empire no longer censures anything. All art, and all thought, is ruined when we accept this permission to consume, to communicate and to enjoy. We should become the pitiless censors of ourselves.

15. It is better to do nothing than to contribute to the invention of formal ways of rendering visible that which Empire already recognizes as existent.

[find the original translation here & read an extract of his lecture about these 15 theses here, both from Lacanian Ink]

12 Comments

  1. deadgod

      4. Is there an “imaginable way of totalizing” anything? – except those things which are to be condemned, like ‘totalization’ and “Empire”.

  2. Shane Anderson

      whenever i read this essay that was, i believe, first given at cal arts, i kick myself for not having the money to go to cal arts. seems like folks have a good time out there. and there’s always good music and art coming out of there. (is there any good writing?)

      also, have you had a chance to read Badiou’s Conditions? it’s real nice. especially the essays on Beckett. have to admit tho that i struggle with being and event. i think i’d need more math nerd friends to help me through that one.

  3. Elisa

      Re: “2. Art cannot merely be the expression of a particularity (be it ethnic or personal). Art is the impersonal production of a truth that is addressed to everyone.” The problem is that people think art created by white men speaks to everyone, but art created by women and minorities speaks only to other women and minorities.

  4. Anonymous

      xrl.us/bh8nzm

  5. Trdrd

      b2cshop.us

  6. Christopher Higgs

      Hey, Shane,

      Cal Arts has a kick ass writing program…Steve Erickson & Maggie Nelson are among the faculty, and they publish the always cool BLACK CLOCK magazine.

      As a general rule, I avoid Badiou. He wrote a dumbass attempt to critique Deleuze called The Clamor of Being, which was an uncomfortable read because of the way he talks about his troubled personal relationship with Deleuze coupled with the sort of jealous/backhanded tone of his attack. And I find annoying his obsession with mathematics. I did, however, find these 15 theses provocative, and they gave me something to think about the other day. Perhaps I’ll look up his Conditions at the library….maybe his writing on literature would be more appealing.

  7. Christopher Higgs

      You make a very good point, Elisa. Badiou’s theses do seem to ring with a kind of (false) post-race/post-gender tone. This creates a large (problematic) gap between theory and practice, which is part of the ongoing debate we’ve seen here at htmlgiant whenever these issues are raised: can we ever have a post-identity art — and even if we could, is such a thing desirable?

  8. Dan Hoy

      “The problem is that people think art created by white men speaks to everyone, but art created by women and minorities speaks only to other women and minorities.”

      “Badiou’s theses do seem to ring with a kind of (false) post-race/post-gender tone.”

      I’d be hesitant to interpret his theses this way, given the context of Badiou’s history, philosophy, and practice. His radical egalitarian stance is about as inclusive as you can get, and he has a history of backing it up with the L’Organisation Politique and other forms of direct intervention in support of immigrants, workers, etc. I’m not an expert, but at heart I’d say he’s on the side of the “remainders” – these are the people who aren’t even accorded the lowly status of “minority” since they’re classified as non-existent within the state framework. I understand being put off by his tone on occasion but to suggest he’s naïve is naïve. I like a lot of Badiou’s prose but personally don’t find these particular theses evocative, except for the last point, which is apropos of the question regarding post-identity art: “It is better to do nothing than to contribute to the invention of formal ways of rendering visible that which Empire already recognizes as existent.” Rather than reiterate the “Empire” party line by conflating essence with identity, maybe we should challenge ourselves to reconcile why a person who fights for people who aren’t recognized as people would be so against the expression of particularities.

      Christopher, I haven’t read the Deleuze book, but you might appreciate the eulogy Badiou wrote for Deleuze (available in the “Pocket Pantheon” Verso put out), in which he prioritizes their mutual trust in the infinite over their strategic disagreements, and lovingly refers to him as a “future contemporary” who “stands alongside us” on the frontline.

      If anyone’s looking for a shortcut into where Badiou’s coming from, “Philosophy in the Present” is a quick read. It’s a dialogue between him and Zizek – it’s not an overview by any means but it’s candid and clear and touches on some of the “controversies” surrounding his positions.

  9. deadgod

      not debate in support or even anticipation of “post-identity”, but rather questioning the conditions for the possibility of some particular claim of ‘identity’

  10. Shane Anderson

      Hey Chris,

      yeah, i’ve got an old copy of black clock lying around and i think it must have been a very early edition because while some of the ideas in the stories were interesting, i found the general delivery to be lacking. i imagine it’s gotten better.

      Badiou is a tough one. I like his essays on love, poetry and beckett. these are all in conditions as well as some other stuff i’m not so interested in (his politics and math for instance). i also think there’s something interesting about his thesis (in conditions anyway) that philosophy arises out of the four conditions of science, poetry, love and politics. he holds, if i’m not mistaken, that philosophy is nothing more than the finger pointing at truths in these conditions. the first essay in the collection is nice for its attack on wittgenstein and the history of philosophy. the problem is that he ends up relying on some weird neo-platonist scheme, tho he slams a historical perspective. like i said, Badiou is tough.

      in any case, i remember there being a rather nice contrast between the two of them in the preface.

      happy reading!

  11. Christopher Higgs

      Hey, Dan. Thanks for your thoughts.

      I am prejudiced against Badiou, for sure, but I didn’t mean to imply that he was naïve about anything. Dude is wicked smart, and should be considering he had Althusser as a teacher. I also wouldn’t dispute your assertion that “he’s on the side of the “remainders” –“, however I would suggest that the methodology presented in some of these theses (the one Elisa points out is a good example) do seem to possess the potential for seriously negative outcomes for those “remainders”. His whole “from everyone to everyone” idea is one of those ugly Marxist ideas that sound all liberating, but really play quite nicely into the hands of power.

      My personal argument against Badiou is less about the first part of that thesis, and more about his absurd assertion that “Art is the impersonal production of a truth that is addressed to everyone.” I don’t believe art has anything to do with “truth” impersonally produced or otherwise. I have argued this point exhaustively elsewhere and will continue to do so until I die, I suppose. Truth is one of the worst concepts ever invented by the human animal. I loathe the idea of truth, especially when it is applied to art, and I especially despise any attempt to make art utilitarian.

      But now I’m just getting all fired up without having my morning coffee. At any rate, I will seek out that eulogy you mention. Would be curious to see what all he has to say about Deleuze. Thanks for suggesting it.

      –Chris

  12. Fifteen suppositions from John Maus on art, music, blowing up cities on film and Ariel Pink

      […] named his third album after an especially forbidding line from philosopher’s Alain Badiou’s “Fifteen Theses on Contemporary Art,” which suggests a set of constraints to apply when making […]