Why has 'Commodity' Become a Dirty Word?

Commodity:
1. Something useful that can be turned to commercial or other advantage.
2. An article of trade or commerce, especially an agricultural or mining product that can be processed and resold.
3. Advantage; benefit.
4. (Obsolete) A quantity of goods.

If you were anywhere near the South Bank on the afternoon of the 10 May, you might have seen two figures shrouded in black plastic bags carrying a bucket and a sign stating “Artists say NO to commodity. Please give generously...” Walking from Tate Britain to Tate Modern , the specters of Art's Past and Art's Present collected funds and stares in a bid to alert the passerby to... What exactly? The dangers of being an artist who needs money yet doesn't wish to contribute to commercialism? The perils of commerce that transforms art into articles of trade?

Cack-u-like, a self-described “radical anti capitalist art group”, is behind this cryptic death march. Since 2001, they have aimed to “challenge the inherent elitism in the art world” with performances like Demonstration Against Toffs in Art (2001) and the upcoming exhibition What’s the F@£king Point in Doing Art which will last one evening and will culminate in the works being destroyed and thrown away at the end of the opening. (If you wish to submit rubbish/art the deadline for entries is the 30 August... )

There is certainly a relevance to criticism of the art market and its impact on the lives of artists and the perception of art. As long as criticism of a status quo leads to alternatives, it can be both radical and instrumental in changing the situation. Sadly, Cack-u-like appears to have adopted a rather hopeless view at the moment: “The generalized feeling after these events was the Bourgeoisie domination of the art world is a fait accompli and any form of Demonstration about the situation will merely be either ignored or digested by art institutions and anaethersized [sic.]”

A glimpse at the very productive and compelling arguments of Gustav Metzger , Hans Haacke and other masters of active resistance to the apparent pitfalls of the art world confirms that there is great art to be made out of great dissatisfaction. They have been invigorated to defend their beliefs in the face of ignorance and, although their work is now recognized and respected by art institutions all over the world, they have actively maintained their marginal position. I would say these artists have gained something along the lines of the third meaning of commodity: “Advantage; benefit”. Why chuck it all away?

read more

Wrong-wrong-wrong

Gustav Metzger, Wolf Vostell and Al Hanson
Photo credit: Tom Picton
Lent by the artist's family
Image taken from Tate Britain's website

Have you ever seen about 200 people simultaneously bending forward in their seats, literally straining to try and hear every word uttered by someone sitting on a stage meters away? It's quite a sight and you would have witnessed this had you attended the Talking Art event with Gustav Metzger at Tate Modern on the 29 March. Indeed, the founder of auto-destructive art had a few chosen words to impart on his rapt audience.
Gustav Metzger is bemused by the current state of the world. To be exact, he has been bewildered by the vicious cycle of conspicuous consumption and waste that we perpetuate for over 60 years. Amazingly, none of that time has eroded his sharp mind, or his conviction that our way of life is wrong-wrong-wrong. In fact, it appears that time is on the artist's side, considering that his work is just as relevant now as it was 30 years ago. Not only is he generating new projects, but he also gets to stage ideas he had decades ago such as Project Stockholm, originally conceived in 1972 for the UN Environmental Conference in Stockholm produced for the 2008 Sharjah Biennale.

His ease with the contradictions that will arise over the course of such a long career is exceptional: he can without a phone, a television and a computer but he is not averse to having someone else Google for him. He believes in the potential of the internet to create powerful networks outside of the realm of capitalism but he doesn't have to let the technology via which internet is accessible dominate his life. He is convinced that humankind is bent upon self-destruction and yet he has faith in the younger generations' intelligence and potential. He is concerned with artists making a living yet he is appalled by the price a piece of canvas can fetch in the current overinflated art market. In other words, he doesn't pretend to hold the answers to the questions raised by his work but he knows the questions need to asked over and over again until enough people think about them.

Feeling like I've been kicked in the head, ideologically of course, I forgo an expensive espresso at the museum's cafe and walk home, still a bit hunched over from all that straining forward but thankful for Gustav Metzger's definition of the Avant-garde: A desire and need to go beyond the existing. I'm all for it.
read more