***  Haus der Kulturen der Welt: Forum1 Archive  ***
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   [Date]: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 10:55:23 -0600
   [From]: Juan JosŽ D’az Infante  <jdiazinfante@altamiracave.com>
     [To]: Cultural Exchange via Internet <forum1@hkw.kbx.de>
[Subject]: Re: [forum1] Re: Censorship

Pablo

I would like to clarify 


When I meant handicrafts, I was being cynical about the process of choosing
material for a museum and in many cases the total misunderstanding of many
of the pieces hanging there.  There is so much emphasis in justifying a
piece hanging in a Museum that the valild context about the piece becomes
its literary - "pseudomarketing" context . (pseudomarketing in disguise of
literary justification)

There are two ways to set up the hierarchy of a Museum: as an absolute icon
on top of the average mortal understanding or as a catalizer (catalizador)
for things to happen.

System number one:In a perfect world, a museum should be run by artists
themselves, they are the ones that understand the codes and context. Since
they are run by administrators of art, "connoseurs", art historians,
collectors. The museum becomes exactly that if run in a way by a historian
becomes about history, a collector becomes about a fetish or an obsession
for collecting, or as a politically correct administration. There is nothing
wrong about a museum like that, but there is definitely a misuse of the word
art when maybe it is only paintings. There is  a radical difference between
being a very good painter and becoming an artist. And that line is always
the hardest to see since it is the notion of a higher "quality".

In system number two: things become more human, but it needs to be open even
to bad art. It is a system that would have to be inclusive instead of
exclusive. And that is when a curator can really count in setting up a
context on an aleatory exhibition.Unfortunately the structure of power does
not lend itself to something so mundane, there is no way of justifying the
expense of money in probable "bad art" (no literary justification no good
art).

Only as a note:
The difference between both systems has to do with the  good and bad usage
of power in an stablished organigram. The origin of the problem lies as far
as a problem concerning a "bussines administration" layout and "design of
systems". To discuss it only from the art point of view becomes circular.
End of note.

There is no question of the need to save Velazquez, but there is no sense in
imitating what we believe would be a modern Velazquez and repeating the
formula endlessly (as artist and as a curator). Repeating the formula is
what makes a contemporary painting actually a handicraft conceptually .The
concept of artists as we have it today is a very recent, an artist in that
time was a different character, Leonardo was a designer of weapons,
engineer, etc.

A couple of years ago I stated a metaphore at The International Forum of
Contemporary Art at Guadalajara which I think applies now: "To think that
art exists only in the museums is like to think that God exists only in the
churches". Religion exists only in the churches and I think that museums
become very much about themselves the same way. It would be too arrogant to
be that absolute. Only when you take art seriously becomes very complex, but
art is not a serious business.


 I don't think that, as you suggest by your question, "communication for
> the masses is necessarily vulgar",

The boom of art is caused because of an exemption in taxes, not because now
they understand art. That is vulgar. Clinton or Zedillo are by no standards
classy people, not even elegant (Democracy creates 3rd rate leaders, I mean
this as a definition and not as an insult ).
The masses are not necessarily poor. Most rich people I know are very vulgar
(in the benign way in which vulgar can be used). We use their money to
create the illusion of depth. I was yesterday in Monterrey, Mexico, which is
the classic example of what I am talking about. I was at the Cultural Center
of Alfa in front of the vitral (stained glass window) called the Universe by
Tamayo. There is no bigger piece of crap. I do think that Tamayo is a
brilliant painter with brilliant works unfortunately the Universe is not one
of them by any standards.  Unfortunately no one dares to tell the emperor
about his new clothes... Who shot the curator?
"La cultura termina donde comienza el cabrito" Carlos Fuentes


> Joseph Beuys, we agree that everything can be art and everyone an artist;
> but if everything is art, then nothing can be art too, and that's a problem
> that we have now.

That statement has been worked out even earlier than Beuys. The whole Dada
(1913) was very much about that and for people that were no painters. And it
is very unfortunate that we are unable to assimilate what Beuys means by
such important statement, we still do not believe in the vision of the
mystic. To take it at face value you can only get to your same conclusions,
but if you understand that what Beuys means it becomes a process of
conscience, attitude and communion then it makes all the sense in the world.
It is more about the process than to the piece of art. There is no way of
collecting the process.It is pretensious to create an illusion that Art has
to be excluded from life and belonging or dependant only to experts. That
creates even more confusion, I prefer Jaques Vache poetry than to get in
continous frauds like Berenson and Duveen.


> "The artist of today is
> the one who knows how to write proposals for grants." Yes, it helps to know
> how to write and get grants, but I can guarantee you that if that person's
> art has nothing to say, sooner or later the good made by those grants will
> not amount to anything.

I think your position is a little naive in this case, Even mud gives the
illusion of depth, Saint Augustin defined the problem in his book the
confessions. No one recognizes the truth if someone uses a barbarism and on
the other hand the everyone listens to the expert in rethoric. Macluhan
insisted in how the medium becomes

"Es m‡s importante la Imaginaci—n que el conocimiento"
Albert Einstein

Juan JosŽ D’az Infante
www.altamiracave.com
jdiazinfante@altamiracave.com
Tel (525) 5687575
Fx (525) 5684451
Cel 1914558
Crest=F3n 192
M=E9xico DF 01900 Mexico