Visualising the Relations of Art

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO MARXIST ART THEORY VISUALISING THE RELATIONS OF ART @GLUMBIRD /     MEDIUM.COM/@JRBML.PUBLIC

INTRODUCTION WORCRKAIEPNPIGRTEACLSLISAASESRMSSTMARX makes an In The German Ideology (1845), Marx important observation on the and Engels wrote   nature of art in The Grundrisse. that 'the exclusive concentration Put bluntly: art is an historical of artistic talent in particular processs which constructs the individuals, and its suppression in ideological shape of reality.  the broad mass which is bound up with this, is a consequence of In this sense, art belongs to what Marx describes the division of labour.’ as the ideological superstructure of society in his How is artistic talent suppressed 1859 Preface to a Contribution to the Critique of in the broad masses? A primary Political Economy. This is not simply a reflective method is the economic category, which can be suggested by Marx’s exclusion of the working class juxtaposition of the concept against what he calls from artistic production. To work the material or economic basis of society, ‘the in the art industry requires both real foundation’. Marx’s proposition in Grundrisse time and the means to support that art plays an active role in the production of oneself outside of waged labour, society suggests a far more complex relation often whilst working unpaid. This between the superstructure and base of society. exclusion is evident in statistics: This pamphlet will explore the basics of a only 18% of music, performing Marxist conception of art as such a process, and visual arts staff in Britain are culminating with a visual representation of art's from working class backgrounds. relations. It is an introductory text, intended to aid study rather than replace other texts.

BASE The superstructure of society 'arises' upon its economic base.In Marxist thought the economic This phrase highlights Marx'sbase of society is determined by understanding that material reality conditions our thought. humanity's relationship to its Marx includes the political, legal, productive forces. Under philosophical, artistic and religious in this category.capitalism this takes the form of the relationship between the SUPERSTRUCTURE working class to the capitalist class - that is, waged labour.

BASE SUPERSTRUCTURE Of course, in reality these processes However, Marx does not position are experienced at the same time. the superstructure of society as Marx is using an abstract model in an inert or secondary process. order to explain how power and Rather, Marx describes the ideology operate in class society. superstructure as an active Marx gives the economic base process, dealing with 'ideological primacy in determining the class forms in which men become structure of a society as it is where conscious of this conflict [the division of humanity intoclass power concretely devolves from. classes] and fight it out'.

ART AND SUPERSTRUCTUREHaving located art as an ideological form within the superstructure ofsociety, we can now begin to define how it can impact society. As Marxsays, the superstructure of society is where human beings becomeconscious of contradictions within the economic organisation ofsociety (the base) and fight them out. This means that art is one ofseveral ideological forms which can shape material reality. How this takes place on a broad, social scale is beyond the scope ofthis pamphlet. In order to even begin answering it, we first need tounderstand what art is.

What is ofimportance to art,Marxism and societyis the question:What social functionis art playing?Christopher DEMYSTIFYING THE ART OBJECTCaudwell. In an essay on D.H. Lawrence in his 1938 collection Studies in a Dying Culture, the Marxist artist and critic Christopher Caudwell (Christopher St John Sprigg) argues that under 'bourgeois society social relations are denied in the form of relations between men, and take the form of a relation between man and a thing, a property relation, which, because it is a dominating relation, is believed to make man free.' This applies to art as much as it applies to other spheres of life. Therefore, in order to understand what art is, we must first dispel the mystification of its definition produced by its appearance under capitalism.

ARTIST DEMYSTIFYING THE ART OBJECT BJECT ART O PRODUCTIONCaudwell argues that bourgeois society demands that the artist 'regard theart work as a finished commodity and the process of art as a relationbetween himself and the work, which then disappears into the market'. Inother words, the economic organisation of capitalist society asks the artistto consider the art object purely in relation to themself, as a producer ofcommodities for the market. This relation is depicted in the diagram above.To Caudwell, this can produce two ideological effects.(1) That the artist view the art object purely by its market value and theirown production only by its relation to this value. This leads to thecommercialisation of art.(2) The commercialisation of art 'may revolt the sincere artist', leading themto attempt to forget the market and consider art only in relation to their own- that is, art for art's sake. This leads to art becoming more formless andindividualistic as the art is intended only for its artist.

DEMYSTIFYING THE ART OBJECT AUDIENCE BJECT CONSUMPTION ART OJust as bourgeois society demands the artist consider art purely in relationto themselves and the act of production, the audience of an artistic pieceare asked to consider art purely as it relates to their consumption. The artwork seems to appear, fully made, from the market. Its consumptionappears as an activity relating only to the individual, for their pleasure,completely bereft of any clearly social character or purpose. As such, theproduction of art remains mystical. This relation is depicted in the diagramabove.Understanding that the economic relations of capitalist society obscure thenature of art is a crucial step in understanding what art is and how itdevelops under capitalism. At this point, however, we are still lacking aconcrete Marxist definition of what art is. Caudwell provides such adefinition in the remainder of his essay on Lawrence.

Art is not in any case a relation to a thing, it is arelation between men, between artist and audience, andthe art work is only like a machine which they must bothgrasp as part of the process. Christopher CaudwellTSITRA PRODUCTION CONSUMPTION ECNEIDUA ART OBJECTAs Caudwell says, art is a social relationship. Once this is understood, itbecomes far easier to grasp what it is. If I were to produce a painting andkeep it for my own, personal, consumption, it would not be art to anyoneother than myself. If I should die and the painting placed in a gallery, itwould be transformed and become the social relation “art”. What is and isnot art is determined by how an object is used. The diagram above depictshow this relationship functions in its most basic and abstract form. DEMYSTIFYING THE ART OBJECT

ART IN SOCIETYUnderstanding that art 'is a relation [...] between artist andaudience' allows us to understand art as a concrete processcarried out by people. However, this forces us to face another question. If artoccurs between people it must be conditioned by society, asall people exist within society. The question is deceptivelysimple: how and when does society influence art?

ART IN SOCIETY Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. KARL MARX THE 18TH BRUMAIRE OF LOUIS BONAPARTEIt is true that - as Marx says - people 'make their own history' but not 'as theyplease'; it is equally true that people make their own art, but not as they please.Just as people make history in given circumstances they make art in givencircumstances. The traditions of society, both artistic and general, necessarilyplace concrete limitations upon what a work of art can be or otherwisecondition its meaning.

ART IN SOCIETY A WORD ON THE MEANINGAt its most simplistic level, the notion thatart is conditioned by society and social OF THE NIGHTMARE OF TRADITIONtradition is evident. For example, law canplace a clear boundary on what can be 18TH BINRMUARMX'SAIREsaid within a work. There are, however, other ways in It's easy to miss what Marx means in thewhich art is conditioned. A style may section of the 18th Brumaire quoted on thebe dominant in the art form practiced last page. Often the meaning is distorted toby an author, and this could influence imply that 'tradition' is a kind of inescapable,them to make something in that styleor in response to it. The artist may omnipresent force which determinesexperience a certain historical event, human actions.which then forms the basis of theirwork. An artist may promote or For Marx, however, 'tradition'  here refers tocriticise the political, moral or forms of behaviour based upon pastreligious beliefs within their society.Ultimately, even the building blocs of practices that are still active in humanart - words, images etc - are society. Tradition 'weighs like a nightmare'conditioned by society. Put bluntly: an because it possesses a material influence.apple only symbolises sin in western Equally, the word 'weighs' is used to showsociety because the history ofwestern aesthetics has conditioned that human actions are conditioned byus to understand the symbolic tradition to produce certain outcomes, butmeaning of an apple in such a way. that these outcomes are not a given.

Understanding that society conditions the meaning of art from the standpoint of production forces us to recognise that this conditioning process must also take place at the point of consumption. In other words, the meaning taken from an artwork by an audience is necessarily conditioned by the same kinds of forces which condition artistic production, ranging from historical events to the socially accepted meaning of given symbols. Of course, this does not mean that the meaning of a work will always align with that intended by artist, even if an audience exists in an identical historical context. This is because the influence of society on art is mediated by individual experience. This is depicted in the diagram below. INDIVIDUAL  EXPERIENCE ECNEIDUA / TSITRAART IN SOCIETY TXETNOC LAICOS

The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas. Karl Marx The German Ideology (1845) To Marxists, the influence of society on art tends to produce artworks that promote the values and politics of the ruling class within that society. This occurs for concrete, material reasons. As Marx says in The German Ideology, the intellectual dominance of a ruling class is due to the control it exerts over 'the means of mental production' - that is, universities, schools, publishing houses, film studios, etc. This allows the organisation of the production of ideological content and produces the tendency for ideological works to reproduce the ideas of a ruling class.ART IN SOCIETY

A BASIC VISUAL MODELOF THE RELATIONS OF ARTThe analysis of art's relations put forward in the \"Demystifying the Art Object\" and \"Art inSociety\" segments of this pamphlet can be rendered as the visual model above. This isthe most abstracted and simplistic way of understanding the relations of art throughMarxism. Nevertheless, it is hoped that the model provided is useful in understanding atleast where to begin a Marxist analysis of any given artist, art object or audience.

This pamphlet is an attempt @GLUMBIRD /     MEDIUM.COM/@JRBML.PUBLICto explain the most basicelements of a Marxistanalysis of art in a visualformat. Further reading andother materials with moredetail on the subject areavailable on my Medium. Ifyou have any comments,don't hesitate to get in touchon Twitter!If you enjoyed this work andwould like to support it, thenplease make a donation atthe PayPal address below.Any amount, no matter howsmall, would be greatlyappreciated. paypal.me/jrbmlFeel free to print anddistribute this how you wish.