Subject: Re:avant-garde today?
From: alastair.dickson-AT-almac.co.uk (ALASTAIR DICKSON)
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 95 23:31:00 +0100



On Tue, 18 Apr 95 07:58:31 EDT Malgosia <ma-AT-dsd.camb.inmet.com> wrote:

MA>I would love to see a discussion of this notion that the total
MA>eradication of the institution of art can, _by extension_, eradicate
MA>the social order.  To what extent does this notion make sense?  What
MA>are its roots?

In my message I implied that I find it unsatisfactory - a kind of End-ism
which carries a lot of baggage - but that it has provisional use in the
way Ford used it to draw a distinction within the art world. 

In its more usual form, I think, the viewpoint isn't quite as Malgosia
paraphrased it: rather that the aim of a given avant-garde cannot be met
within the art institution and must involve extensive activity which
overflows and eventually eradicates the institution and social order.

The more eradicationist position described by Malgosia is probably best
expressed around the Art Strike.  Stewart Home's "Art Strike Papers" has
various discussions around this and is available as spunk457.txt in the
etext.archive.umich.edu archive directory pub/Politics/Spunk/writers/SHome

The whole topic could be a useful discussion. What does anyone else think? 
__________________________________________________________________
-- Alastair Dickson             I  <alastair.dickson-AT-almac.co.uk>
-- Stirling, Scotland           I
---
 * Orator V1.14 #31 * 


     --- from list avant-garde-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------