Chapter XIV - ARTISTIC BEHAVIOURS
In almost all of our languages, the word art indicates two
almost opposite notions which we will consider separately.
1. Everyday Art: Elucidation
and Confirmation of Codes
Instead of favoring
photography as art, the cultural policy of FNAC took into account its various
incarnations as a mass phenomenon.
CAROLE
NAGGAR, The FNAC Collection.
Man as the signed animal is truly constituted by images and
sounds, some of which are natural although many are conventional and therefore
function as signs. Thus, at all times and everywhere, man is inclined to
produce images and texts whose codes are exceptionally visible and
consistent so that he can configure himself and the group to which he
belongs. These image-signs and discourses, whose codes are obvious and
well-coordinated, are used eloquently by man, just as the objects and bodies he
finds. He feels pleasure whenever he encounters them. This might be called
everyday art. A nice drawing, a melodious song, a nicely written or spoken
text, as well as clothes, utensils, a successful home, a committed or
conventional political image - these can all be sources of joy.
The photograph evidently has an output rich enough to fulfill
these criteria. The indicial character is carried over onto the imprint, and
these indices are strongly indexed. These indexed indices refer to signs or
object-signs, sometimes to stimuli-signs, and very often to figures in the
classical sense of the term. And this indexation answers to visible and
relatively coherent codes. Denotations, connotations, and perceptual field
effects are immediately decipherable and contain almost no false cues. Up until
the nineteen fifties, this type of photography undoubtedly organized its field
effects more formally, or rather, more forms and depths were distinguished
according to the ideal of western perspective and production. By contrast,
nowadays the overlaps of forms and depths are sometimes welcomed, as evinced by
David Hamilton's popularity. But this still concerns mostly directly recognizable
codes to members of a broad group at a given moment.
It is be possible that the photograph, owing to its isomorphism
and synchrony, as well as its temporal, spatial and physical superficiality, is
particularly apt at fulfilling this social function. The postcard and the
poster have become typical examples of everyday art in almost every field.
Today they relay what once were, in the era of painting, the images of
Epinal. In his booklet The Photograph, French photographer Edward
Boubat presents a clever and delightful collection of rules governing good
photographs of this type. The cover of the book shows the democratic tenets
they often carry.
|
|
"Toi etÝ moi", Lancio, 1983.
|
The photo novel is an extreme case. It not only applies
immediately recognizable and very strict codes to the images, but also to the
words and to the sequencing of events, thus effecting a generalized rigidity
and clarity. By virtue of the photograph as imprint, it can pretend to create
more real situations than those evoked by a simple text. However, it
simultaneously disconnects these situations from the complexities and the
unpredictability of real life. This is attained through the absolute legibility
of indexes, through the grouping of successive moments on the same page (thus
demonstrating the code governing their sequencing), and through the ostensible
disconnection of the characters whose words, gestures and facial expressions
are not in sync (in particular, their mouths remain immobile). One could even
say that the photo novel tries to create non-situational situations,
where the reader feels close to everyday life while moving within a prudently
demarcated fantasy, enabling a projection without the risks inherent to
passionate identification or empathy. The legibility of codes is so strong that
the photo novel is no longer an object for sociology - it is almost ready-made
sociology in itself.
2. Extreme Art
Brodovitch told us things like: If, looking in your
viewfinder, you get the impression that you have seen this somewhere before,
well, don't shoot it then.
HlRO
The act we will dub extreme art is not the perfecting of
everyday art as a way of exceeding it. To a large extent, extreme art follows a
strictly inverse path.
a) Radicality
Instead of providing correct forms and harmonious compositions,
that is to say, instead of clarifying and accounting for societal codes,
extreme art radically questions things. At the same time as signs, and also on
their level, extreme art envisages how they structure and de-structure
themselves, keeping in mind that, without exception, they can only locally and
temporarily capture the chaos, pre-structures, and quasi-relations - signs can
never fully seize the latter. Thus, not only is extreme art animated by the
drives of life and death, it also explores the entropy and negentropy of all systems, as well as sense and the
absurd, thereby unveiling the gap and the anti-scene (beside-the-scenes,
before-the-scenes and the after-the-scenes) of every language, figure and
construction. This is what Rabelais, Beethoven, and the Dogon and Olmec
sculptors put to practice. This surely also applies to the intransigence one
can find in sexuality, fundamental science, philosophy, sports records and
mysticism. Extreme art is the version where man presents himself with both a
mental capture of what is at the "heart" of things, as in fundamental science
and philosophy, as well as a sensorial capture, as in sexuality, mysticism and
sports.
The photograph responds remarkably well to this. One need only
recall what we have discovered about
its texture and structure. As all imprints, its zones are steeped in the
anti-scene of pre-semiotic quasi-relations. Its indices, which are never
defined as regards to their border, number, and exact range, reinforce the
capture of fluctuations that shake systematics. Its spatial isomorphism and the
synchrony of its registration immediately instill a terrible impartiality which
goes before, after, and outside of all duration and any familiar timeframe.
While dissolving reality, its absence stands in for the real, and therefore, in
a certain sense at least, it is present in the
upheaval of being and non-being that makes every ontology tremble. It frees
itself from structural links with the infinitely large and the infinitesimal,
hurling us back to the origin. It forcefully inscribes the universe as a
succession of irreversible states - the never-again-nowhere of any
event. It brings out little of the situational of any situation. And the human
body appears continuously at the bottom of auctorial intentions, giving away an
unconscious, a "that," which is no longer merely psychical but also
cosmo-physical.
The photograph therefore has all it takes to satisfy those who
wish to pursue the radicalizing impetus of extreme art. This does not entail
miming the effects obtained in other age-old practices, such as painting for
instance, whose effects are normally those of everyday art. Extreme art is
produced when photography is faithful to its own texture and structure.
b) The Photographic
"Subject"
However, extreme art does not employ the world as its setting
in an undifferentiated manner. Its products are always marked by a society and,
within this society, by biological and semiotic individualities. It might stem
from what the group or the individual wants to express deliberately, as was the
case with romanticism and expressionism. But originality persists even when it
is not pursued for its own sake. The radicality of the products of extreme art
is always seized from a certain angle, through a singular revelation or
construction, causing Mozart, Beethoven, a Dogon or a Polynesian to produce
equally radical results that make each of them directly recognizable. Few are
marked by their denotations or connotations, which are broadly shared anyhow;
they are mostly marked by their perceptual field effects. These are so specific
that that one could designate them by the term pictorial subject for painters,
the architectural subject for sculptors, the architectural subject
for architects, and the textual subject for writers. These subjects
designate the specific rates of aperture-closure, density-porosity,
continuity-discontinuity, concentration-diffusion, and so on, which bring forth
sounds and rhythms in music; traits, touches, colors, volumes, and materials in
architecture, painting and sculpture; sounds, rhythms, and curvatures between
logical and fantasmatic series when dealing with literature.
Once again, the photograph can here join the other arts. Let us
name a few particularly insightful cases. Robert Capa is identifiable through
delicately wrapped lighting, no matter whether it concerns a mountain,
trousers, or bloodstains on the ground. We recognize Cartier-Bresson through
salient volumes, which he captured in the photographs of prostitutes of Mexico
City and North African children in a courtyard. We recognize William Eugene
Smith through tapered angulations that invigorate the "coloration" of black and
white contrasts, which culminated in The Spinner, and which he found in
rural scenes, the posture of a doctor or of family members at a wake in a
Spanish village. We can recognize Edward Weston through a texturology in which
an impartial focus intersects with things and light, arrangements and
degeneracies conveying a certain eternity. Dorothea Lange produces an
articulation she desired to be audible, phonetic, in the back of a shirt or the
branch of a tree. Walker Evans gives us frontality, planarity and magnified
quadrangularity. William Klein: the panic of the turbulence of urban events.
Avedon: the physiology and geology of epidemics. Irving Penn recognizes himself
in the tension between luminous pomposity and mortal cut-ups. André Kertész:
blinding structures. Robert Mapplethorpe: edge to edge filled with large areas
of imponderable dimension, where all forms, left behind rather than immobile,
well up, in a slow instantaneity, to forge a connection between the void and
the fragment.
However, it has to be stressed that photographic subjects
do not posses the same resolve as textual, musical, pictorial, and
architectural subjects. Vivaldi is almost immediately recognizable from his
first to his last work, practically measure by measure. Painters, architects,
writers and musicians evince great constancy, even if it is that of
inconstancy, as with Picasso for instance. Their musical, textual, pictorial,
and architectural "subjects" vary little whatever the denotations and
connotations they revert back to. Furthermore, it is the artist who chooses the
denotative and connotative themes that might, according to his intuition,
harbor perceptual field effects. The photograph is different.
It is the aforementioned Avedon who made fashion photos for Vogue
of celebrities he invited to pose to exhaustion, photos bespeaking the death
throes of his father: the three series complement one another, and they even
partake of the same physiological and semiological interest for the life of death. But
undoubtedly this link is more apparent when we associate Mozart's operas with
his chamber music. When looking at a painting, we involuntarily exclaim, due to
the determinacy of the pictorial subject: here we have a Rubens, this is a
Hockney. Before a photograph, one can hardly say: This is a Capa, an Avedon, a
Cartier-Bresson, or a Walker Evans.
One could regret this situation, and see it as a weakness.
Alternatively, one could sense something original here, and be attentive to it.
If human intervention is less imperious to photography than the other arts, it
is because the universe-world barges in more than anywhere else. In addition,
the transmutability of the photograph instantly allows it to evade its author,
which cannot be said of most other productions.
We have yet to discuss photographic style in addition to
its subject. We have not addressed style because it originally referred to the
quill, and because the quill, whether with respect to text or drawings, refers
to the graph, and therefore to the field of signs, which does not pertain to
photography. The word ‘subject' in photographic subject, far from being
ideal, does not have this disadvantage, at least if one marks it off clearly
from the theme or the scenic subject of a photograph. Besides,
"subject" has the virtue of clearly indicating that photographic field effects
are not simple forms (embellishments of a contents, in the classical sense),
but constitute a perspective, a vision, an overall capture, a fundamental
phantasm and a different kind of denotation, which, partly existential, is
often the true "contents" of extreme art but also of publicity. Moreover, the
term "subject" does not sever the photograph's field effects from the
photographer's, or, in other words, it respects the link between the
photograph's texture and structure and that of the decision-maker's brain. Even
if a photograph by Cartier-Bresson is not really a Cartier-Bresson
(as one could say of his paintings), it still goes out from
Cartier-Bresson. What we have before our eyes are not only imprints and indices
steeped in their field effects, but also mental schemas forged by the same
field effects. The activity of looking at a photograph struck us because of its
extremely apposite activation of the indices-mental schemas couple (in the
plural and in overlap). The act of photographing astonishes because of the same
characteristics. With the same effacement of long-standing subjectivity,
as the centre of reality and the Cosmos-Mundus, to the benefit of a subjectality
transfixed by the real, as a universal state amongst many other universal
states.
c) Only Slightly Reflexive
Indicialogy and the Impossible Self-Portrait
Finally, it is rather unlikely that someone pursuing extreme
art will not end up, at a certain moment, engaging in a particular form of radicality
and singularity, i.e. the interrogation of the nature of the medium itself. A
reflexive attitude asserted itself in all the arts from 1950 onwards, giving
rise to paintings about paintings, sculptures on sculpture, literature about
literature, music on music, and cinema on cinema.
Is there such a things as photography on photography as
well? One can find examples pointing in this direction. Dibbets brought out the
importance of skylines in the shot. Moholy-Nagy thematized the meshing and
weaves of the photo's shades, as Zielke itemized the transparencies and leafage
of light. Ernst Haas practically made a systematics of the originary pairing
information-noise in the fusions of color photographs. Friedlander carried out
the most thorough exploration of the implication of the photographer in what is
photographed. One could say that the series of captioned photographs by Duane
Michals and Nakagawa are not only narratives-figures, like photo novels, but
reflections on the figural (not figurative) aptitude of the photograph, by
virtue of the gap between the captions and the ambiguity of the shots. Finally,
Douglas Crimp shows that as early as 1895, Degas, conspiring with Mallarmé, had
produced a veritable semiotics or an actual indicialogy of photography.
Even so, one could maintain that the photograph is less driven
to this type of self-referentiality than other artistic endeavors.
Paradoxically, the photographs of uttermost reflexive significance have often
attained this only by accident. Everyone knows Robert Capa's famous series of
the landing in Normandy. The film was ruined in the London studios. In the end,
eight negatives survived the accident, which only serves to intensify one of
their fundamental aspects: photos are problematic imprints. The result of this
mishap activates a staggering semiotic and indiciological complex concerning
the nature of present or absent appearance, manifestation, and events. But the
fascination, so well-suited to the nature of photography, arises not from
premeditated intentions but from an exterior accident.
The self-portrait is a good test for the highly irregular
reflexive possibilities of signs and indices. The classical painter, working
with semiotic traits, excels in this genre and confirms his ‘Me', his
microcosm. Here, the photographer, trapper of contingently indexed indicial
imprints, fails. ‘Me' is a matter of the mirror, as Narcissus believed. The
photograph is not a mirror. In a photograph, the "I" is captured from the back
and in delayed-action (Denis Roche), in its black shadow (Tress), as an
anticipated corpse (Schwarzkogler), as a reflection among reflections
(Friedlander). However, in the latter case the ‘I' discovers its positive
status: to be a state of the universe among other states.