Produkowanie estetyk, produkowanie podmiotu. Początki odwilży i wolność twórcza w sztukach wizualnych na przykładzie wystawy w Arsenale

J. Dąbrowski
{"title":"Produkowanie estetyk, produkowanie podmiotu. Początki odwilży i wolność twórcza w sztukach wizualnych na przykładzie wystawy w Arsenale","authors":"J. Dąbrowski","doi":"10.14746/aq.2018.29.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Polish art history, there are two approaches to the “Arsenał” exhibition of August 1955. One, rooted in the debates around it, presents the “Arsenał” as the beginning of a political “thaw” – an act of emancipation, a demonstration of young artists who rebelled against the socialist realism. The other approach to the show or, rather, to the “thaw” as a whole, rejects an interpretation of artistic processes and choices as autonomous activities. Instead, with reference to the theory of Michel Foucault, the “Arsenał” is considered as a result of a reconfiguration of scattered power relations, stimulated by the changing strategies of the institutional power system. The present paper follows the latter approach. Foucault claims that power relations are combined with three interconnected types of human relations: defining the hierarchy of tasks and division of labor, compelling obedience, and performing “communicative binding,” i.e. purposeful action that affects the actors’ knowledge of the world and of themselves. After 1954, power relations in Poland were strategically changing: the system of labor division and the distribution of art, including all the related benefits, was still centralized, but the ineffective administrative control relaxed, while the production of meaning changed as well – the communist party modified its rhetoric referring to art and the range of artistic choice grew together with the options of communication. Still, the liberalization of the system and abandoning the Moscow version of the socialist realism in cultural policy did not mean any real increase of the freedom of choice. Using state exhibition institutions and the press, which was the main channel of communication between the authorities and the masses, the communist regime continued to control the aesthetic consciousness of the artists. An analysis of both printed and visual messages found in the press of the period, specialist periodicals and daily newspapers alike, has revealed a surprising similarity of the official discourse and the aesthetic choices made by the participants of the “Arsenał” – in particular those choices which were later interpreted as attempts to reject the socialist realism and launch a new beginning. It seems that the young artists were “positively censored,” i.e. the regime succeeded in creating an aesthetic reality which they accepted. What is more, they considered it subversive as an emanation of liberty. The selection of the aesthetic modes favored by the authorities took place in an unconscious way already at the stage of creation, before particular works of art were accepted by the ”Arsenał” jury and before they were actually controlled by the institutions of censorship.","PeriodicalId":345400,"journal":{"name":"Artium Quaestiones","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artium Quaestiones","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/aq.2018.29.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Polish art history, there are two approaches to the “Arsenał” exhibition of August 1955. One, rooted in the debates around it, presents the “Arsenał” as the beginning of a political “thaw” – an act of emancipation, a demonstration of young artists who rebelled against the socialist realism. The other approach to the show or, rather, to the “thaw” as a whole, rejects an interpretation of artistic processes and choices as autonomous activities. Instead, with reference to the theory of Michel Foucault, the “Arsenał” is considered as a result of a reconfiguration of scattered power relations, stimulated by the changing strategies of the institutional power system. The present paper follows the latter approach. Foucault claims that power relations are combined with three interconnected types of human relations: defining the hierarchy of tasks and division of labor, compelling obedience, and performing “communicative binding,” i.e. purposeful action that affects the actors’ knowledge of the world and of themselves. After 1954, power relations in Poland were strategically changing: the system of labor division and the distribution of art, including all the related benefits, was still centralized, but the ineffective administrative control relaxed, while the production of meaning changed as well – the communist party modified its rhetoric referring to art and the range of artistic choice grew together with the options of communication. Still, the liberalization of the system and abandoning the Moscow version of the socialist realism in cultural policy did not mean any real increase of the freedom of choice. Using state exhibition institutions and the press, which was the main channel of communication between the authorities and the masses, the communist regime continued to control the aesthetic consciousness of the artists. An analysis of both printed and visual messages found in the press of the period, specialist periodicals and daily newspapers alike, has revealed a surprising similarity of the official discourse and the aesthetic choices made by the participants of the “Arsenał” – in particular those choices which were later interpreted as attempts to reject the socialist realism and launch a new beginning. It seems that the young artists were “positively censored,” i.e. the regime succeeded in creating an aesthetic reality which they accepted. What is more, they considered it subversive as an emanation of liberty. The selection of the aesthetic modes favored by the authorities took place in an unconscious way already at the stage of creation, before particular works of art were accepted by the ”Arsenał” jury and before they were actually controlled by the institutions of censorship.
在波兰艺术史上,1955年8月的“arsenazov”展览有两种方式。其一,植根于围绕它的争论,将“阿尔谢纳沃夫”作为政治“解冻”的开始——一种解放的行为,一种反抗社会主义现实主义的年轻艺术家的示威。展览的另一种方式,或者更确切地说,将“解冻”作为一个整体,拒绝将艺术过程和选择解释为自主活动。相反,参考米歇尔·福柯的理论,“阿尔谢纳沃夫”被认为是由制度权力系统的战略变化所刺激的分散的权力关系重新配置的结果。本文采用后一种方法。福柯声称,权力关系与三种相互关联的人际关系相结合:定义任务等级和劳动分工,强制服从,以及执行“沟通约束”,即有目的的行动,影响行动者对世界和自身的认识。1954年以后,波兰的权力关系发生了战略性的变化:劳动分工制度和艺术的分配,包括所有相关的利益,仍然是集中的,但无效的行政控制放松了,而意义的生产也发生了变化——共产党修改了关于艺术的修辞,艺术选择的范围随着交流的选择而扩大。然而,体制的自由化和在文化政策中放弃莫斯科版的社会主义现实主义并不意味着选择自由的真正增加。共产党政权利用国家展览机构和作为当局与群众沟通的主要渠道的新闻界,继续控制艺术家的审美意识。对在这一时期的报刊、专业期刊和日报上发现的印刷和视觉信息的分析,揭示了官方话语和“阿尔谢纳佐夫”参与者所做的美学选择的惊人相似性,特别是那些后来被解释为试图拒绝社会主义现实主义和发起一个新的开始的选择。年轻的艺术家们似乎受到了“积极的审查”,即政权成功地创造了一种他们接受的审美现实。更重要的是,他们认为这是一种自由的流露,具有颠覆性。当局青睐的审美模式的选择在创作阶段就以一种无意识的方式发生了,在特定的艺术作品被“arsenazov”评审团接受之前,在它们被审查机构实际控制之前。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信