On Deconstruction as an Aesthetic Theory

Derrida‟s theory of Deconstruction belongs to Postmodern Culture as uncertainty and self-awareness are now the issue at hand rather than taste and beauty and this redefines our notion of aesthetic judgment. The outcome of our appraisal of any artwork depends on what perspective we choose to judge it from and Deconstruction is just such a viewpoint. The critical nature of Deconstruction in conjunction with Postmodernism was fed by the radical redefinition of art in the 1960s and 1970s and branched off into various trajectories of self-examination. One of these is Post- Colonialism which we will explore through Australian artist Gordon Bennett's Notes to Basquiat (Jackson Pollock and his Other), 2001. Philosophers aim to define the conditions of truth, knowledge and our relation to the world. Deconstruction pinpoints the fact that their relation to their own language is part of the problem. Philosophy is a series of contradictions and Deconstruction has as its aim to expose this. It has as its aid the theory of Semiotics that focuses on our relation to language and the manner in which this relationship manipulates our conception of reality. Once having revealed the paradoxes of life and the oxymoronic nature of reasoning, Deconstruction proceeds to expose the inherent hierarchies of logic and to then inverse them. The effects of this is to disrupt the established and accepted canons of reason, logic and truth which together from the basis of philosophy itself. This is reflected in - or perhaps a product of - this age of uncertainty where self-awareness rather than beauty draws our focus in the arts. As we live in a continually evolving world, words – their connotation, use and even definition – must adapt and thus, notions such as „aesthetics‟ likewise change. Let us here define aesthetic judgment as a conscious, trained analysis of visual works that overrides our primary reaction to said work. It is our critical appraisal of the work and depends on what point of view we are choosing to judge it from; Deconstruction is just such a viewpoint and is wonderfully adapted to our fractured age. Derrida argues that the rhetoric of language, which forms the claims of philosophy, is simply a means of expressing its discourse. The threat of writing, as opposed to oral discourse, lies in the inevitability of its affecting the very meaning of what it represents which is thought; the realm of philosophy. Writing is merely a “mediating [system] through which thought is communicated… [That] presents language as a series of physical marks that operate in the absence of the speaker.”1 These claims can be interpreted so that „text‟ becomes „art work‟ and „physical mark‟ the brush stroke on a canvas or mark of chisel on stone. The orator is now the artist and the futility of writing is translated into the very real and ever present threat of misreading a work of art; the artist‟s intent; symbolism (which makes up the language of art) etc. Art, like philosophy, is a search for truth, differing in terms of accessibility and audience, although sometimes these converge. If anything, the fine arts are more adept a language for expressing thought and emotion as it appeals directly to the mind of the viewer with out the presence of the written word to intercede its meaning (unless a thesis is required to explain the artwork). Unlike philosophical discourse, the artists need not be present for the viewer to fully appreciate the subject; art is subjective and is meant for personal interpretation. Whereas the threat of writing is 1Jonathan Culler, On Deconstruction: theory and Criticism after Structuralism (Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., Great Britain), 1983, 91 that its very existence as a mode of expression and demonstration is enough to affect the core meaning of what it represents, art offers a more direct contemplation. The danger of art as a means of expression lies in the possibility of an artist‟s lack of skill in transparently depicting what it is they mean to express. As aforementioned, art is open to various interpretations without this strictly meaning that it is being misinterpreted, it is personal in the making and subjective in the receiving. However, one does require of artists to be well versed in the art of sensibility to maximize the potential for thought and emotion to be transmitted clearly to the viewer through visual means. The advent of Formalism and its elitist focus on technical concerns and the prerogative of the artist as an individual caused a backlash that resulted in the shift of focus from traditional skill to an all-invading self-awareness. A shift in the communicative strategies of artists was thus required. All radical elements pertaining to artistic movements that reacted against Modernist art in fact carried on and developed its tradition of assaulting audiences in the refusal to be passively accepted, an attitude borne in the hope that the public would use the energy of their anger generated by such insult to see and question their own passivity. This can be found in Pop Art‟s adulation of the ugly or lowbrow and embrace of the consumer nature of our culture, exemplified in Warhol‟s Brillo Box series (1964) that directly replicate a commercial packaging, transforming a mundane product into a desirable commodity. This would resurface with Postmodernism in the 1980s with the likes of Jeff Koons‟ undeniably kitsch sculptures such as Michael Jackson and Bubbles (1988) whose only concerns are its accessibility and the cultural evocation it will produce in its audience, “almost like television, I tell a story that is easy for anyone to enter into and on some level to enjoy.”2 The late 1960s saw the „Death of Art‟ that came to be repeatedly claimed over the following decades. „Non-art‟ announced the end of art due to the fact that it was bound by its own materiality; art that was not art, or else a memorandum to art, was produced not out of hatred but rather as a means of protection. Mel Ramsden‟s Secret Painting (1967-68) is a prime example in that the artist refused to allow his work to be commodified by the viewer or owned, in essence, by the art world. In order to achieve this freedom, he very simply withheld the subject matter from them all. Minimalism saw the separation of practice from the anthropological aspect of Modern art. Conceptual art simply refused to fulfill audience expectations of entertainment and Performance art, sometimes through audience involvement, used intervention to open the possibility of a work having multiple meanings. Together, these radical elements form the conditioning of Postmodern culture; the questioning of the meaning of art and why themes of „minor discourse‟ are considered of less importance than the great artistic traditions handed down by the „Masters‟. The Postmodern world is characterized by the “identification and manipulation of the universal genetic code”3, meaning that it is fragmented, aesthetically speaking. It is comprised of sub-cultures based on aesthetic principles that adhere to, vary on or revolt against the past. There is no cultural theory to integrate them. Once the radical elements of the various art movements that resulted from the backlash against 2 Koons, Howard Fox, Avant-Garde in the 80s (The Post-Avant-Garde: Painting in the Eighties, Art & Design, Great Britain), 1987, 29 3 Norman F. Cantor, Twentieth-Century Culture: Modernism to Deconstruction (Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York), 1988, 345 Formalism were absorbed into the art market, artists were left with endless questions regarding themselves and their practice. Society had become so engrossed with the notion of individuality that the strive to express this; to assert authenticity, originality or at the very least a ringing statement, became the sole unifier. Though the need to revolt against institutions had almost became a given, the most outrageous is now accepted and implemented within contemporary art institutions. All that is left is questions, but more importantly, the ability and freedom to question. This is where Deconstruction ties into contemporary art both aesthetically and philosophically for it offers us the alternative of creating or reading into any work any which way we like, as many times as we like. „Logocentrism‟, the idea that meaning is present or intrinsic in a word, image or text is a cultural desire. It ties in to the age-old delusion dating from Plato of the metaphysics of presence; the longing for truth, essence and meaning to be contained within objects. Derrida repeals this notion by claiming that there can be no fixed, mediated access to knowledge. “Il n‟y a pas d‟hors texte” which translates to “There is nothing outside the text”4 is not Derrida‟s denial of reality, rather, it is simply his pointing to the fact that there is no fixed meaning or ultimate truth. The key concept of Derrida is that of différance, or, „defer-ment‟; that language is a network of intervals and delays, that meaning is endlessly deferred as the signifier becomes yet another signifier. It is the intrinsic opposition at work in each text that leads to it deconstructing itself by taking the surface signification and breaking it down into several simultaneous layers of meaning. There are infinite readings of any one text as Postmodernism has shifted the focus away from the object itself to its cultural meaning5. The Postmodern condition has fragmented the nature of the signifier and so Deconstruction has become an objective, involuntary process that accompanies our aesthetic appraisal of any artwork almost intuitively. Post-Colonialism is the critique of the exploitative logic of Colonialism and relates back to Deconstruction and Postmodernism through cultural relativism. Australia is at the heart of the Post-Colonial debate due to a history imbrued with genocide and the subsequent displacement of an entire people and their culture. Themes and issues that pivot around the dominant role of Western culture in the construction of cultural identity have found a mode of expression in the artwork of Gordon Bennett. Grounded in his own personal struggle for identity as an Australian of Aboriginal and Anglo-Celtic descent, he engages critically with Australia‟s colonial past and postcolonial present. His Notes to Basquiat (Jackson Pollock and his Other) of 2001 represents the high point of appropriation in its use of signs and symbols pertaining to popular culture to layer the themes present in the work. It is a painting of massive scale that is structured almost as a triptych. Commencing its reading from the left, we are confronted with imagery of 9/11 in the style of Basquiat with red Islamic writing that translates to “In the name of Allah, the beneficent, the merciful”, a saying used before a good dead. Bennett‟s appropriation of Basquiat‟s style, the first black superstar to arrive on the New York art scene in the 1960s, ties in these multiple elements and thus the first section can be interpreted as a comment on the prevalent prejudice towards cultures other than all-white American. The middle section of the 4 Derrida, Bill Readings, Introducing Lyotard: Art and Politics (Routledge, London), 1991, 5 5 Norman F. Cantor, Ibid, 356-364 painting has Bennett appropriating himself, utilizing a painting done whilst an art student and superimposing two figures from Immants Tiller‟s The Persistence of Language (1987) upon it, a link to deconstruction and semiotics in the way language controls and defines our perception of reality. The third and final section is an appropriation of Jackson Pollock‟s Blue Poles: Number II (1952) and so his discourse on cultural identity, explored in an international context, is thrown back against an Australian backdrop, for Blue Poles is symbolic of an era of reform in Australian politics. The purchase of this artwork by the Whitlam Labor Government had been a controversial issue as the Australian public considered the purchase price exorbitant and so, Pollock is presented as a catalyst for transformation. Bennett‟s appropriation of Basquiat, Immants Tiller, Pollock and even his own work paradoxically establish an affinity between each and all. They derive from the same source, are produced in the same era and coincide with the first successful forays of black and colonized cultures into Modernism. Bennett‟s concern with signs is not in their inadequacy in representing reality, but in their power to stage ideologies as they articulate the unconscious of a culture rather than its everyday. As an aesthetic theory pertaining to Postmodernism, Deconstruction enables us to slice through the history of art and lay bare all preconceived notion, forcing us to examine every aspect of our relation to the world, to the notion of culture and each other. Its use of Semiotics has deepened our self-awareness, as we are now conscious of our use of signs and their power of manipulation. Gordon Bennett‟s critical examination of Post-Colonialism in his painting Notes to Basquiat (Jackson Pollock and his Other), 2001 exemplifies the effect Deconstruction has had on our thoughts and subsequently, our behavior. (2,123 words) Bibliography: Books Bennett, Gordon / McLean, Ian, The Art of Gordon Bennett, Craftsman House, Australia, 1996 Cantor, Norman F., Twentieth-Century Culture: Modernism to Deconstruction, Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 1988 Culler, Jonathan, On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., Great Britain, 1983 Readings, Bill, Introducing Lyotard: Art and Politics, Routledge, London, 1991 Sandler, Irving, Art of the Postmodern Era: From the Late 1960s to the early 1990s, HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., New York, 1996 Catalogues: Gellatly, Kelley, Gordon Bennett, National Gallery of Victoria, 2007 Magazines: The Post-Avant-Garde: Painting in the Eighties, Art & Design, Great Britain, 1987 - Howard Fox, Avant-Garde in the 80s Websites: http://www.greenaway.com.au/Artists/Gordon-Bennett.html#Essay3 - Ian Mclean, 911 (with Apologies to Walter Benjamin), 2002 - Greg Dimitriadis & Cameron McCarthy, Urban Renewal: Gordon Bennett's Notes to Basquiat (911), 2002 - Ian McLean, Gordon Bennett's abstract art: the aesthetics of commitment and indifference, 2004 - Ian McLean, Who is John Citizen?, 2006 - Ian McLean, The restless cosmopolitan, 2008 „Deconstructionist Theory‟, The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism vol.8 From Formalism to Poststructuralism (Cambridge University Press, 1995), http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/derrida/rorty.html