The Right, The Wrong and the Postmodern

Opposition and Nihilism: two primary and contradicting

factors of Postmodern Art and Culture.

An analysis of Santiago Sierras artistic practice.

Maya Nogradi

UNDERGRADUATE DISSERTATION
Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of
BA(Hons) Photography

University of Brighton
01.02.2014

word count ~ 8500

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 2
 ABSTRACT

This thesis investigates contemporary approaches of postmodernism both in art and

criticism, and the authenticity and possibility of voicing disagreement with a political
order through art. The thesis seeks answers to questions such as:
a. Is Santiago Sierras work efficient as a criticism of capitalism and are
postmodern artistic practices efficient in criticising postmodern culture?
b. Is ethical criticism relevant when evaluating politically concerned art?
c. What characteristics link Spanish political artist Santiago Sierras work to
capitalism and postmodern culture?

Theories of Claire Bishop, Grant Kester, Jacques Rancire and Gabriel Rockhill are
juxtaposed in order to investigate current debates around the overlap of politics and
aesthetics and the role of ethics in art-criticism.

Exploring the similarities between the patterns of lefty anti-capitalist artist Santiago
Sierras work and the political order he opposes, the thesis disputes the validity of
artistic practices that criticise an existing system by adopting end replicating its
mechanisms. Sierras aim is to transform the system into its own criticism through
displaying its coercive forces. The thesis proposes that the nihilistic character of
Sierras approach might result in the reversal of his original aim and transform his
work into propaganda for liberalism.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 5

I. SANTIAGO SIERRAS REPLICATING PRACTICE ........................................................ 7

II. RESISTANCE AND NIHILISIM .................................................................................... 11
III. DISABLING ETHICAL CRITICISM ............................................................................. 18
IV. SANTIAGO SIERRAS POSTMODERN CHARACTERISTICS ................................. 26

CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 33

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 36

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 4

 INTRODUCTION

The following thesis offers an analysis of Spanish artist Santiago Sierra (b.1966) as a
case study of the postmodern artist, drawing mostly on the recurring patterns of his
work which are reminiscent of those favoured and generated within todays global
capitalism and neo-liberalism. Characteristics of Sierras art that are compatible or
closely connected with the context of postmodernism and late-capitalism will be
observed. Sierras tendency to criticise an existing system despite identifying with its
principles is the catalyst of a discourse about the efficacy of his message. The tension
deriving from the coexistence of an oppositional and a submissive manner will be
analysed in relation to the Foucauldian antinomy that resistance confirms power1.

Recent developments in the field of art criticism and philosophy investigating the
relationship between art, politics and ethics, such as the writings of Claire Bishop,
Grant Kester, Jacques Rancire and Gabriel Rockhill will be reviewed and
correlated.

The first chapter introduces Santiago Sierras practice and the theoretical debate it
triggers. The central element of Sierras art, the reproduction of work relations under
the capitalist regime, will be explained.

The second chapter discusses the possibility of resistance within the capitalist era.
Sierras ideology will be juxtaposed with alternative approaches to resistance both in
the theoretical and the artistic realm. Positioning Sierra in the context of the
Capitalist and Postmodern era, connections between the political and economic
system of Capitalism and the artistic movement of Modernism and Postmodernism
will be outlined.

The political and the participatory aspect of Sierras practice generate a discussion
regarding the role of ethics in art and art criticism and the overlapping features of
politics and art. The third chapter assesses the validity of criticism concerning
Sierras work and reflects on Claire Bishops claim that criticism built on ethical

1
The theory of Foucault will be explained in more detail in the third chapter. The original theory can
be found in Michel Foucault, History of Sexuality Vol. 1: An Introduction, (New York: Pantheon
Books, 1978), 95.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 5

grounds is an erroneous approach, called forth by the curatorial modality of
contemporary critical practice. Although Sierras aesthetic decisions will be
considered, the chapter will direct its attention to the dispute of criticism based on
ethical rather than aesthetic requirements.

The final section will revisit the stages of the evolution that led to the current
position and character of artists in relation to their political and societal context.
Patterns of capitalism and postmodern culture that recur in Sierras oppositional
practice will be enumerated, and necessary conclusions drawn.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 6

 I.

SANTIAGO SIERRAS REPLICATING PRACTICE

Interest arranges all things like a host.

Attila Jzsef: Humans 1936

Spanish artist Santiago Sierra (b.1966) comments on the exploitative nature of

capitalism and the labour market. Marxist ideas about class struggle and consumer
culture pinpoint his claims. Carl Marx explains that a system in which Market is the
power that organizes people creates a society that equates individuals merely with
their market value.2 Sierra criticises the capitalist system described by Marx, where
the measure of value is purely financial, and where human life is degraded and
submitted to monetary interests.

Sierra expresses his criticism through minimalist installations that reproduce the
malevolent dynamics of the capitalist labour market, such as its hierarchical and
exploitative relationships, discrimination, marginalisation and social exclusion of the
working class and minorities. Sierras critical installations comprise elements of
performance and participation: he hires marginalised and poor workers to perform
humiliating, meaningless, physically enduring or painful tasks set by the artist in
exchange for a small amount of money.

Fig. 1: Santiago Sierra, Hooded woman seated facing wall, 2003.

2
See David Lyon, Postmodernity (Buckingham : Open University Press, 1999), 12.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 7

Never stating more than the situation of the performance, the titles of his pieces
include an account of the person he paid and his task, and often the means of
remuneration for the work. The clear, descriptive titles correspond to the replicating
simplicity of Sierras artistic practice.

In the piece Hooded woman seated facing the wall (2003, Fig. 1) exhibited at the
50th Venice Biennial for example, Sierra pays an elderly woman to sit still for four
hours facing a wall. The piece held a clear mirror to reality: a little further up the
hallway the guard spends eight hours a day on his feet.3 By highlighting such
settings Sierra wants to stick [his] finger in the wound and say that the work is
definitely torture, that it is indeed a punishment of biblical proportions.4

Fig. 2: Santiago Sierra. Workers who cannot be paid, remunerated to

remain inside cardboard boxes, 2000

Sierras reproductive manner thus asserts that criticism does not call for elaborate
exposition. But the presence of some sort of negativity is inherent to Sierras posed
situations. His performances always carry a sense of tension and generate discomfort
in the spectator. In his piece Workers who cannot be paid, remunerated to remain
inside cardboard boxes (2000, Fig. 2), workers sit under cardboard boxes and their
suppressed breath leaks through the cracks and thin walls of the rough boxes as
visitors walk by. The mens concealed but obvious presence generates an
uncomfortable atmosphere in the gallery space. The critical modality is indicated by

3
Teresa Margolles, Santiago Sierra, BOMB 86 (Winter 2004), accessed February 01, 2014,
http://bombsite.com/issues/86/articles/2606
4
lbid.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 8

the situation itself and there is no need to go into an elaborate articulation of his
message. According to him, it is enough to reproduce a clear image of the
detrimental apparatus of capitalism in order to turn the system into its own criticism.

Sierras reproductions of reality evoke the character of the photographic process. By

stating only the situation itself and trying to replicate existing situations, Sierra takes
on the attitude of a documentary photographer. Apart from the replicating
perspective of Sierras works however, there is another important element that
emulates a photographic quality.

Instead of hiring actors who represent the real subject of his work, Sierra persists on
the physical presence and participation of real people who are directly affected by the
ameliorating apparatus of capitalism. His performers thus do not merely substitute
the workers exploited by the labour relations, they are in fact identical to themselves,
representing their own circumstances. Without the presence and participation of the
subject matter Sierras installations could not be completed. Unlike the painter, the
photographer is unable to create a picture without his actual subject matter being
present at the time of the depiction. Similarly, the physical presence of the subject
matter is primordial in order for a photograph to emerge. Given that the participators
form part or the whole of the piece, it can be noted that indexicality is just as inherent
to participatory and performance art as it is to photography.

French philosopher Jacques Rancire acknowledges Sierras realistic representation,

and counterpoises it with vague and glamorising works that describe capitalism as
immaterial5, a world that is nothing but screens .6
When he [Santiago Sierra] pays immigrant workers minimum wage to dig their
own graves or to get tattoos that signify their condition, he reminds us at least that
the equivalence of an hour of work and its effect on the body is not the so-called
equivalence of everything that slides across a screen.7

Rancire contrasts Sierras realistic approach to ambiguous theories describing

capitalism as a chaotic wasteland of spectacle. According to French philosopher Jean

5
Jacques Rancire, Fulvia Carnevale and John Kelsey. "Art of the possible: Fulvia Carnevale and
John Kelsey in conversation with Jacques Rancire.", Artforum (March 2007)
http://www.egs.edu/faculty/jacques-Rancire/articles/art-of-the-possible/
6
Ibid.
7
Ibid.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 9

Baudrillard (1929-2007) for instance, consumption is the main attendant of class
domination and it leads to the blurring of the borderline that separates objects from
their representations. Baudrillard revisits the phenomenon described by Karl Marx as
a process of alienation: the detachment of the consumed product from the coercive,
exploitative process that led to its appearance in shop-windows. But while Marx
concentrates on the exploitation and alienation of the working class by the
bourgeoisie, the subject and agent disappear in Baudrillards theory and all that
remains is consumerism, a machine without direction and without control.

Sierra does not believe that reality does not exist. On the contrary, he claims to
expose the reality of the terror that Capitalism imposes on the lives of the working
class, to spectators who might only conceive it through the distorting and
euphemising filters of social media. Sierras straightforward juxtaposition results in
the aggressive reversal of the capitalist process of alienation.

Instead of alienating the commodity product (result) from the exploitative process
that produced it (source), Sierra apposes the source and the result. The shock effect
of his work lies precisely in the dichotomy between the desperate workers and
homeless and the luxury of high profile fine art galleries.

The juxtaposition of conflicting elements recalls the method of collage. In The

Emancipated Spectator, Rancire discusses a photographic art piece made in a
similar manner of juxtaposition. Although Rancire refers to a different artist when
discussing the phenomenon, his words are also applicable to Sierras practice:
[It is] not a collage in the technical sense of the term, but its effect exploits the
elements that account for the artistic and political success of collage and
photomontage: the clash on the same surface of heterogeneous, if not conflicting,
elements.

When comparing Martha Roslers photomontages to Sierras collage-like

installations, one only has to switch the element of the luxurious American homes on
Roslers pictures with pristine gallery spaces, and the shocking images of soldiers
and terrified civilians with the poor and humiliated workers, immigrants, prostitutes
and the homeless. Just like a collage, Sierras work becomes a shortcut for meaning,

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 10

mounting together the two basic elements of an argument. In Martha Roslers case
the elements were the pretence of the glamorous American life, and the horror of
Vietnam War, while in Sierras it is the pretence of the glamorous and sophisticated
High Art scene and the horror of the labour market. Both depict the rotten reality
concealed under the glittering surface of well-being, freedom and liberalism.

In contrast with still images, Sierras performances involve movement, which

enables the artist to depict the interaction between the two opposing ends of
Capitalism (the oppressive power and the oppressed people). By involving a
command, the delivery of the task and the payment for it, Sierra highlights the
relationship between him and the workers. The conflicting elements are not simply
juxtaposed but also linked, and the submission of the people to the power is clearly
visible. This link is the basis of Sierras criticism. The determining and confining
disposition of labour market conquers, exploits and capitalises on everyone we all
work for the machine8 of Capitalism.

8
Teresa Margolles, Santiago Sierra, BOMB 86 (Winter 2004), accessed February 01, 2014
http://bombsite.com/issues/86/articles/2606

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 11

 II.
RESISTANCE AND NIHILISM

At the top of our voices we all sing,

Borne on the gusto wine and powders bring.
Attila Jzsef: Humans (1936)

The harsh forms and edged lines, the minimalist structures and cheap materials, the
degrading and demanding commands, the plain titles and rigorous documentation
through black and white photographs all represent the authoritarian and imperative
order of capitalism. By generating an atmosphere reminiscent of dictatorial,
totalitarian regimes, Sierra complains about the catalogue of promises of a
liberation that has been taken away from us9 and declares, The worst evil of
society is its broken promises.10

The grim picture Sierra paints of the system severely contrasts with the declaration of
freedom and individual rights that the winning western powers of the second world
war propagated when American liberalism marched in and gained ground in Western
Europe.

The role of resistance and protest in liberal democracy necessitates the examination
of the differences between American liberalism and Soviet totalitarianism. These
differences crystallised during the Cold War in a competition between the two
winning superpowers of the Second World War, the Liberalist West and the
Communist Soviet Union.

British writer and journalist Frances Saunders wrote an article for The Independent in
1995 about the cultural aspect of the Cold War between the USA and the Soviet
Union.11 Later she expanded on the topic in her book The Cultural Cold War: The
CIA and the World of Arts and Letters.

As Saunders points out, the Central Intelligence Agency (founded in the beginning of
the Cold War in 1947) was responsible for the distribution and promotion of artistic

9
Ibid.
10
Ibid.
11
Frances Saunders, Modern art was a CIA weapon, Guardian (1995), accessed February 01,
2014, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 12

modernism in order to ease the way to proliferate American liberalism across
Western Europe.

The Congress for Cultural Freedom was established with CIA funds to promote
Abstract expressionism and American anarchist avant-garde.12 The fact that the
members of these avant-garde movements were mostly anti-capitalist lefty
intellectuals who had very little respect for the government in particular, and
certainly none for the CIA13, did not undermine the endeavour, rather reinforced it.
Committing vast resources to a secret program of cultural propaganda in Western
Europe14, the idea was to contrast the totalitarian culture of the Soviet Union and
promote the idea of freedom and creativity that Liberalism could foster. As Donald
Jameson, former CIA officer said: Abstract Expressionism was the kind of art that
made Socialist Realism look even more stylised and more rigid and confined than it
was.15 The money invested in the advance of modern art in Western Europe was
committed not merely for philanthropist reasons, but because anything they [the
Soviet Union] criticised that much and that heavy-handedly was worth support one
way or another16 because this way American Liberalism and the influence of the
USA could gain territory in the West. 17

Although the Cold War reached its end with the collapse of the Soviet Union in
1990, the competition is hardly considered to be finished. The tension has recently
escalated and, for example, the fight over Ukraines economic bond is a more and
more overt sign of malignancy. While in Ukraine anti-governmental protests are
repressed aggressively and with enactments that limit the rights of protestors, in the
west, protest is the most important emblem of the image of Freedom and Liberalism.
The imprisonment of the members of Pussy Riot also seems to signal the tension
between the agenda of the two powers. Pussy Riot, a lefty anarchist singer group
carries western values of liberty and free speech and could therefore be identified as

12
Ibid.
13
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid.
16
Ibid.
17
For further information on the interference of the CIA see:
Hugh Wilford, The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America (London: Harvard University
Press, 2008), 100-101.; or Rudolf Frieding, ed., The Art of Participation 1950 to Now (New York:
Thames and Hudson, 2008) 51.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 13

representatives of the Western power striving to weaken the cultural hegemony of
Russia. The discrepancy between other aspects of social justice such as the
flourishing Gay Right movements of the West on one hand, and the Anti-gay laws of
Russia on the other, are further signs of cumulative disparity between the two world
powers.

Noticing the financial success of oppositional art in

the stock market it is not surprising that the language
of anarchist protests (controversy, vulgarity and
aggression) is embraced, glamorised and standardised
by fashion and pop culture. Che Guevara for example
has been the face of Smirnoff vodka advertisements,
Swatch watch designs, was featured in Madonnas
CD cover, and has recently been seen on the T-shirt of English model Liz Hurley
while clutching a $4,500 Louis Vuitton handbag.18 Capitalising on lefty
opposition, The East German Sparkasse Bank released a credit card with Marxs
portrait on it, after one third of all customers opted for the design. The originally
lefty protests such as the Gay Pride have been transformed into major commercial
events; the rainbow flag is now an emblem of popular culture. As Rancire put it,
political radicalism is likewise a phenomenon of youth fashion.19

Just like Che Guevara and Karl Marx, Sierra criticises capitalism. At the same time,
his anti-capitalist installations are celebrated on the art market (he appears both at the
Venice Biennale and Art Basel), and museums that represent him, such as the Tate
Modern, receive funds to exhibit from the very source of Sierras target of criticism:
investment banks, multinational corporations and brokers of fine art. Those who
benefit the most from his art, are those who generate the system he condemns.

If freedom of speech was a weapon used to display cultural power, it might be

possible that Santiago Sierras lefty criticism is successful in the Western art scene
for similar reasons as the American avant-garde was: Because it can be integrated
into the crowd-pleasing propaganda demonstrating the virtues of liberalism. Instead

18
Dennis Abrams, Ernesto Che Guevara (New York: Infobase Publishing, 2010), 13.
19
Jacques Rancire, The Emancipated Spectator (London: Verso, 2009), 28.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 14

of fulfilling its aim to transform the system into its own criticism, Sierras
oppositional practice is at risk of being transformed into a satisfying component of
the system.

In their book History of Modern Art H.H. Arnason and Elizabeth C. Mansfield have
already located the introduction of fine art into the capitalist stock market in the
modernist era. In relation to the rise and proliferation of conceptual art they write:
Many Conceptual artists felt that the qualities that had distinguished modern art
originality, novelty, rarity were precisely the qualities that fuelled modern
commerce. Their views were persistent: by the mid 1980s, artworks had replaced
precious metals and other commodities among some investors as favoured
vehicles for speculation () the practices of the art market as well as those of
collectors and museums provided a source for a number of conceptual projects.
20

Art critic and curator Rosa Martnez asserts that Baudrillards sentiment is reflected
in Sierras practice by pointing at the impossibility of work escaping from the
political economy of the merchandise-sign.21. Indeed, the apocalyptic mood
David Lyon comments on is apparent in Sierras concrete and harsh installations that
seem reminiscent of Baudrillards inescapable and inevitable announcements.

Alternating short and simplistic mottos such as real is no longer possible22 and
truth does not exist23 with long and sophisticated sentences, Baudrillard declares
that everything has become its own representation, (its own screen), and in this world
of simulacra melancholy is the norm24 Rancire terms the character of nihilism of
lefty opposition as left-wing irony or melancholy25, which invites us to recognise
that there is no alternative to the power of the beast and to admit that we are satisfied
by it.26 Baudrillards resigned but jovial acquiescence echoes that of Nietzsche, who
is considered one of the progenitors of postmodern thought. British sociologist David
Lyon (b.1948) sums up Nietzsches sentiment as the Dionysian option of accepting

20
H.H. Arnason and Elizabeth C. Mansfield, History of Modern Art, (Upper Saddle River: Pearson,
2009), 597.
21
Rosa Martnez, C. Medina and S. Sierra, Santiago Sierra (Madrid: Turner, 2003), 17.
22
Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulations in Jean Baudrillard, Selected Writings, ed. Mark
Poser, (Stanford University Press, 1998), 166-184.
23
Jean Baudrillard, Forgetting Baudrillard in Social Text 15 (Fall 1986): 141.
24
Sean P. Hier, ed., Contemporary Sociological Thought: Themes and Theories (Toronto: Canadian
Scholars Press, 2005), 262.
25
Jacques Rancire, Emancipated Spectator (London: Verso, 2009), 33.
26
Ibid.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 15

nihilism, of living with no illusions or pretence, but doing so enthusiastically and
joyfully27.

Foucault, although with the apocalyptic volume turned down several degrees,28
explains his idea of the resistance as an anaesthetising project, after all resulting in
the reassurance of the power that always wins29. He disputes the real efficacy of
resistance claiming that where there is power, there is resistance, and yet, or rather
consequently, this resistance is never in a position of exteriority in relation to the
power.30

Foucaults thought about resistance prompted several critics to voice their query on
the helpless tonality that prescribes an attitude similar to that of Baudrillard and
Nietzsche. According to Marshall Berman, it prepares an ideology of indifference,
encouraging people to remain passive. After all, once we grasp the total futility of it
all, we can relax.31

While stating that there can be no universal truth or master narrative, Baudrillard
creates a master narrative of his own. He passionately denounces universality and
objectivity, but by declaring that truth does not exist, he makes a universal statement.
Sierra repeats this contradiction by resisting against the Capitalism on one hand and
accepting its universal hegemony on the other. Sierra denounces capitalism, and at
the same time vests it with a teleological quality.

Unlike the inescapable natural processes of aging and death, power (capitalism,
exploitation, discrimination) is a phenomenon established by men, therefore it should
be possible to control and change it. But rendering the oppressive and exploitative
system of capitalism impalpable elevates it onto the level of Logos (the organising
principle of order). Sierras left-wing nihilism results in rendering capitalism a
teleological order. As Rockhill explains in his essay A Specter is Haunting

27
David Lyon, Postmodernity (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1999), 12.
28
Ibid., 22.
29
Michel Foucault, History of Sexuality Vol. 1: An Introduction, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1978),
95.
30
Ibid.
31
David Lyon, Postmodernity (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1999), 23.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 16

Globalisation32, Market becomes a force that imposes its laws in such a way that we
have to follow them whether we like it or not.33 This could be a description of
Santiago Sierras situation if we follow his logic that there is no alternative to
exploitation if one lives and works under the capitalist system. Ruling out the
possibility of change resistance becomes pointless. Sierra blends into the system,
which, in Baudrillards terms is itself also nihilistic, in the sense that it has the
power to pour everything, including what denies it, into indifference."1

The question arises: if power cannot be subdued, and resistance will only fuel it, why
resist at all? Sierras work has a critical and argumentative modality. These are the
premises that prepare a resistance. At the same time, his mind is made up: there is no
way out and any attempts to resist are pointless and naive. Thus, the provocative
dynamics of his work prove to be futile. The two main elements of Sierras work,
provocation and nihilism, contradict and anesthetise each other, and this tension is
the reason of Sierras inefficacy. Since provocation and nihilism are frequent and
institutionalised characteristics of postmodern art, and we have demonstrated that the
latter precludes the former, the question arises whether they provide a convenient
terrain for voicing disagreement.

32
Gabriel Rockhill, A Specter is Haunting Globalisation in Deborah Hauptmann and Warren
Neidich, ed., Cognitive Architecture. From Bopolitics to Neopolitics. Architecture and Mind in the
Age of Communication and Information (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2010) 476.
33
Ibid.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 17

 III.
DISABLING ETHICAL CRITICISM

A change of setting does not change the lines.

Attila Jzsef: Humans (1936)

The contradiction of both supplying and opposing an oppressive system results in a

divergence in the critical reception of Sierras work. To the question of whether the
dichotomy between Sierras ethical message and personal example is a weakness or a
strength of his art, both Santiago Sierra and Clare Bishop would probably answer
that in fact, it is the very element that validates his art.

After all - especially in the era of post-structuralism and incredulity towards master
narratives - the task allocated to the artist is that of questioning axioms and generate
dilemmas rather then declaring some sort of objective truth and offering solutions. If
Sierra states that the exploitative nature of labour is applicable to every work
relation, it would be hypocritical to render himself immune.

London-based art historian Claire Bishop (b.1971) counterpoises Sierras practice to

more nave approaches, which try to achieve reconciliation by collaborating with the
spectators in an uplifting project.34 New York-based artist Rirkrit Tiravanija for
example is renown for cooking dinners for visitors of the galleries he has been
invited to.35 Such an act contrasts the bitter pessimism of Sierras work, who knows
that theres no such thing as a free meal: everything and everyone has a price. 36 In
contrast, Sierras art, described properly as participatory rather then collaborative,
paints a much more realistic and critical and less generous picture of the mechanisms
of capitalism. His performances do not involve optimism; he instead refutes any
possibility of reconciliation and rather focuses on the endless suffering of people
under an exploitative regime.

Sierras work illustrates Claire Bishops initiative to shift the criteria for
understanding politically charged participatory art in general. She argues that due to
the overlapping fields of curatorial and critical writing on art, theorists have confused

34
Claire Bishop, Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics in October Magazine 110, (Fall 2004): 51
79.
35
Ibid: 55.
36
Ibid: 70.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 18

aesthetic criticism with moralising judgements. In her view, criticism should
prioritise aspects of aesthetic quality of the finished art-object rather than analyse the
process of the works production. She attempts to correct this misconception by
shifting the focus from the ethical to the formal characteristics of artworks, and
reprehend criticism that focuses on artists ethical impurities. Claire Bishop insists
that critics generally resort to ethical criteria 37, and compare artists projects with
other artists on the basis of ethical one-upmanship the degree to which artists
supply a good or bad model of collaboration.38

It could be argued that the mainstream aesthetics of any era has never been purified
and autonomous of its link to the political and the ethical. Forms carry symbolic
meanings and reflect the tendencies of the subsuming social order. However, it will
be helpful to thicken the borderline drawn by Claire Bishop and other critics between
the two points of view - the ethical and the aesthetic judgement - to understand
Bishops theory and her dismissal of the former in favour of the latter. Although it
would be worthwhile (following the path of Bishop) to analyse the aesthetic features
of political artworks, the argument of this thesis focuses on the debate over the moral
criticism of participatory artworks.

In Sierras case, criticism is generally levelled at the questionable ethics of his

practice. In her analysis of Sierras work, Spanish artist and art critic Pilar Villela
Mascar claims noone has engaged in a heated debate on how ethical his [Sierras]
use of Minimalism or Conceptualism is.39 His problem is that critics concentrate on
the process that lead to the manifestation of Sierras projects instead of the aesthetic
quality of the finished product.

Mascar categorises the elements of an artwork into two groups: the real and the
style. As R.G. Collingwood remarks in The Principles of Art, the matter is what is
identical in the raw material and the finished product; the form is what is different,
what the exercise of the craft changes.40 Hence, an art-object is borne out of an

37
Claire Bishop, Artificial Hell: Participatory art and the Politics of Spectatorship, (London: Verso,
2012), 19.
38
Ibid.
39
Pilar Villela Mascar, Not in my Name. Reality and ethics in the work of Santiago Sierra in
Santiago Sierra, 7 Works (London: Lisson Gallery, 2007), 13.
40
R.G. Collingwood, The Principles of Art (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1938), 16.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 19

artists subjective take on an objective reality. According to Mascar, relevant
criticism concentrates on that which is unique to the artist thanks to his individal
style.
Consequently, Mascar dismisses criticism that targets Sierras questionable ethics,
because it criticises that what is part of the reality, independent of the artists
subjective decisions. The criticism about Sierras complicity (his exploitation of his
workers) has nothing to do with his use of minimalism or conceptualism, but with
another elementary component of his work, the participation and performance, in
other words, the process that leads to the execution of his installations. By dismissing
criticism that deals with this character of his work, Mascar ignores the fact that
participatory art is just as valid a genre as minimalism or conceptualism.

Mascars confusion could originate from Sierras claim that his performances are
exaggerated replicas of an existing reality. Generally speaking, Sierras message is
that capitalism is based on exploitation (a notion that constitutes the objective truth),
and he chooses to show his disagreement through a reproductive activity. But the
element of reality behind Sierras performances is not that low paid workers are often
used to perform degrading activities in gallery spaces within the oppressive regime
of capitalism. For example, Workers who cannot be paid, remunerated to remain
inside cardboard boxes (2000) does not say that immigrants are often kept sitting
under cardboard boxes in gallery spaces, but rather that immigrants are discriminated
and socially excluded. By restaging the work relations of capitalism, Sierra makes
his own decisions to voice this opinion.

In order to understand better why the process should be in the category of the style,
Sierras work can be once again related to photography. As it was discussed in the
first chapter, Sierras practice is similar to the replicating approach of documentary
photography. A documentary photographer, although photographing reality,
unavoidably makes subjective decisions when he takes his picture. His photograph is
merely a representation of reality rather than identical to it. As the Russian film
director Tarkovsy conveys it: You can play a scene with documentary precision,
dress the characters correctly to the point of naturalism, have all the details exactly
like real life, and the picture that emerges in consequence will still be nowhere near
reality.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 20

The question remains whether process is a significant element of Sierras practice, or
should be dismissed in favour of examining the formal qualities of the finished
product. In his book Variable Capital (2008), David Campbell offers a selection of
postmodern art that deals with notions of capitalism. The choice of chapter titles is
itself interesting, indicating Campbells perception of capitalism. Chapters like
Branding, Vanitas, Gold, Standardisation, Sex, Dereliction, Hollywood or Excess
point at the consumerist and individualistic lifestyle characteristic of postmodern
culture. The chapter assigned to Sierra is titled Exploitation. Campbell dedicates the
chapter to develop an analysis of Sierras work that condemns and fosters
exploitation at the same time. Campbell stresses that Sierras innovation lies in that it
draws our attention to the process by which labour power is tasked and expanded,
revealing the power relationship within the cultural act.41 The process leading to the
execution of his minimalist sculptures is not only clearly exposed to the public, but
serves part of the actual visual product too.42 Following the logic of Campbell, the
process that leads to Sierras projects is indeed the prominent element of his practice
and ars poetica.

Apart from Minimalist, Santiago Sierras art can be assigned to genres such as
Conceptual art, Participatory art and Political art. Each of these genres bears its
central aspect within its name. Conceptual art focuses on content and idea rather than
form, Participation encompasses the process that leads to the manifestation of the
project, and Political art involves some kind of critical stance. It seems logical that
criticism of such genres must entail investigation of the process and investigate the
logic of the artwork.

Despite Claire Bishops claim that this results in misleading our attention from the
artwork itself towards the precursory of the work, it is important to notice that
participatory art is unique in its inherent quality to articulate its message through not
only its form, but also its process of production. In other words, the process makes
up a significant part of the content of the finished art-object, and he political quality

41
David Campbell and Mark Durden, Variable Capital (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press and
the Bluecoat., 2007), 83.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 21

of Sierras work underlines the importance of examining its relationship to its social
context.

In his lecture Critique of the ontological illusion, rethinking the relation between art
and politics (Giessen, November 12th 2010), American philosopher and cultural
critic Gabriell Rockhill negates what he terms the talisman-complex43, the illusion
of the inherent political force of art as capable of inducing political change. By
reducing the politics of art to the (...) political power of artistic products, () the
talisman complex forecloses the social dimension of works of art.44 Since art
circulates in the social field45, the artworks must be examined as social objects,
rather then isolated atoms with a supposedly innate politicity46.

Of course, the propositions and strategies, their implicit political implications and
potentialities47 of the finished art-object must also be considered. But the critic can
only understand the politics of any art piece if he examines the complexity of their
production, their distribution in society and their reception by the public instead of
focusing solely on artistic product.48

For example, the role of the production in an artworks politicity is illustrated by the
control that the Pentagon (US Department of Defence) has over major Hollywood
films that touch upon military issues, by regularly bartering military expertise and
extremely expensive military equipment against the right to censorship.49 David
Robb wrote in Operation Hollywood millions of dollars can be shaved off a films
budget if the military agrees to lend its equipment and assistance In exchange,
all the producer has to do is submit 5 copies of the script to the Pentagon for
approval, make whatever script changes the Pentagon suggests, film the script
exactly as approved by the Pentagon, and pre-screen the finished product to Pentagon
officials before its shown to the public.50

43
Gabriel Rockhill, Critique of the Ontological Illusion. Rethinking the Relation between Art and
Politics, Giessen, November 12th 2010, www.thinking-resistance.de
44
Ibid.
45
Ibid.
46
Ibid.
47
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
49
Ibid.
50
David Robb, Operation Hollywood (New York: Prometheus Books, 2004), 25.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 22

Film director John Pilger has made the decision not to cooperate, and assuming that
the only disadvantage he will have was going to be the lack of financial aid, was
surprised when his film (War on Democracy) was not distributed across the US.
After several calls he learnt: his film will not be distributed unless he made some
changes in the content and message of the film.

In this disposition the Pentagon represents the police order through which the power
imposes its distribution of the sensible on society, prescribing what can be visible
and audible within a particular aesthetico-political regime.51 Resistance therefore
should be an emancipatory process that disturbs the distribution of the sensible and
generate a political dissensus that opposes the logic of disagreement to the logic of
the police.

The fact that capitalist corporations fund Sierra might mean that his work is not
simply tolerated by, but actually benefits the interests of the system. It is unlikely
that his work would be distributed in case it did not benefit the ones investing money
in his success. The relevance of production and distribution (two of the three
elements that make up the aesthetic dimension of an artwork) has been illustrated by
the analogy of the Pentagon.
In The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context,
Grant Kester reflects on the third element, the works reception by the audience.

In relation to Santiago Sierras work Kester asserts that given the popularity of
provocative works that aim to embarrass the spectator and generate discomfort, it is
possible that their actual experience
of these provocations () may include elements of pleasure or even self-
affirmation. In fact, the work of Sierra and others is as likely to consolidate a
particular sense of identity among art world viewers (as tolerant, enlightened,
willing to accept risk and challenge) as it is to effect any lasting ontic dislocation.
52

51
Gabriel Rockhill, Translators Introduction in Jacques Rancire, The Politics of Aesthetics
(London: Continuum, 2006), 1.
52
Grant Kester, The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context
(Durham NC: Duke University Press, 2011), 63.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 23

According to Claire Bishop Sierra is successful in generating tension that makes the
spectator aware of his own anxieties53 and thus become self-reflective of his own
complicity in an oppressive specular economy54. But self-reflexivity is pointless
when Sierra states: self-criticism makes you feel morally superior55. Indeed, Sierra
readily admits in his interview with Teresa Margolles: I give high society and high
culture the mechanisms to unload their morality and their guilt.56 The element of
friction57, forcing the spectator to recognise the impact of globalization, is annulled
by such a remark, and the sensations of unease and discomfort58 Claire Bishop
credits his work with become questionable.

Iranian film director Jafar Panahi has also reflected on the impossibility of breaking
out of an oppressive system. His film The Circle talks about three women who
struggle through their lives in a society that is thoroughly misogynist and oppressive.
The film follows their strive to break out of an order that imposes its limitations on
their lives and keeps them in a condition of subservience and inertia. Their struggle is
condemned to be futile in a system whose entire structure is built in a way to disable
them. However, Jafar Panahis film still does not take on the air of nihilism or the
tone of vulgarity, which characterise Sierras works. The consciousness and restless
activity of the three women contrasts the resigned passivity of Sierra and his sitters.
Jafar Panahi, instead of adopting the principles of the organising order, opposes it by
depicting strong, intelligent and capable women paying careful attention to describe
the unique personality of each woman. Thus Panahi shows an issue that is normally
invisible, and renders those capable who are supposedly incapable. He achieves his
aim to destabilise the distribution of the sensible. The danger he poses to the
organising order is reflected in the fact that Panahi is not distributed legally in Iran.
His films are sold in secret and hide in the back of newspaper stands. Panahis
decision demonstrates the weakness of Sierras claim that the only way to be
published is to accept the terms of the market. Saying so, Sierra ignores the
possibility of deciding not to be distributed. In contrast with Sierra who excuses
53
Claire Bishop, Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics in October Magazine 110, (Fall 2004): 79.
54
Grant Kester, The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context
(Durham NC: Duke University Press, 2011), 62.
55
Teresa Margolles, Santiago Sierra, BOMB 86 (Winter 2004), accessed February 01, 2014,
http://bombsite.com/issues/86/articles/2606
56
Ibid.
57
Claire Bishop, Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics in October Magazine 110, (Fall 2004): 79.
58
Ibid: 70.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 24

himself from the responsibility of his principles in his worry for being appreciated,
Jafar Panahi adhered to his principles even if that meant that his art was not going to
be distributed.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 25

 IV.
SANTIAGO SIERRAS POSTMODERN CHARACTERISTICS

While we are sure of our truth and hold it fast,

Our lives gloss over those with bad designs.
Attila Jzsef: Humans (1936)

In The Emancipated Spectator (2009), Rancire calls out for the artists to abandon
their roles as stultifying schoolmasters59, and render the spectator an active,
emancipated partner in the process of understanding art. Jacques Rancire decries the
conventional role of the artist as the schoolmaster who strives to activate the
spectator presuming his inherent passivity and ignorance. Rancire criticises the
Brechtian and the Artaudian theatre, which are both based on separating the spectator
and the artists, rendering the former inherently passive and the second inherently
active. Though with opposite methods (Brecht with distancing, Artaud by shocking
the spectator) both attempt to shake the viewer up from his supposed passivity.
Dismissing this approach, Rancire introduces a revolutionary idea: action is not
necessarily a physical, but rather a mental process. The spectator is active in so far as
he relates the art piece to his own thoughts and makes up his own interpretation of it.

Since participatory art is based on the immediate and direct involvement of the
spectator, it does not promise to deliver Rancires emancipating approach.
However, participatory art might be revalidated through Santiago Sierras method:
spectators are not required to physically participate in his performances. The
spectators only responsibility is the mental presence, and his thinking is enough for
Sierra to believe that they are active. But the fact that sierra renders spectator capable
of thinking does not mean that he also allows them to develop their individual
thoughts.

Grant Kester argues, that Sierra tends to assign a premeditated role to the spectator.
Their agency might be acknowledged, but the particular form of agency60 is

59
Jacques Rancire, Emancipated Spectator (London: Verso, 2009), 8.
60
Grant Kester, The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context
(Durham NC: Duke University Press, 2011), 63.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 26

prescribed by Sierra. Sierra secures the essentially scripted nature of the viewers
presumed answer.61

The participation in Sierras practice is not performed primarily by the audience, but
rather by subject matter. But the participation of the subject matter does not mean
that he is free to transform the art-object according to their thoughts and wishes.
Meanwhile the visitors move across the gallery space, the poor and the working class
sits in their assigned place, inert and passive, in order to trigger thoughts in the mind
of the spectators. The disruption and antagonism produced by Sierra (...) involve
various attempts to force the privileged art world types to encounter the poor and the
working class as they slog through the galleries of their favourite biennial.62

Rancire disputes the conventional belief that the flood of images of suffering and
terror in the media numbs peoples consciousness and puts them in a sedated state of
mind of which they have to be shook up.
If horror is banalised, it is not because we see too many images of it. We do not
see too many suffering bodies on the screen. We see nameless bodies, bodies
incapable of returning the gaze, bodies that are object of speech without
themselves having chance to speak.63

Fig. 3: Alfredo Jaar, The Eyes of Guete Emerita, 1996.

61
Ibid.
62
Ibid., 61.
63
Jacques Rancire, Emancipated Spectator (London: Verso, 2009), 96.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 27

The Eyes of Guete Emerita (1996, Fig. 3), an installation by Alfredo Jaar about the
1994 Rwandan genocide, features a photograph including only the eyes of a survivor.
But these eyes are different the ones that the social media offers, of hungry children
begging for help: they are not issued any role; they are not photographed solely to
display helplessness. They are eyes of someone endowed with the same power as
those who view them, [and] that of speaking or remaining silent, of showing ones
feelings or hiding them.64 Jaar does not put the words into the mouth of his sitters,
but instead enables them to form their own words. Therefore, Guete Emeritas role is
not to represent the suffering masses, but to represent her own identity. Focusing on
the individuals rather then the masses contrasts with the circulating images of mass
media, depicting bodies rather then individuals.

The workers in Sierras project are not substituted or symbolised by actors or other
props. Representing themselves rather then being represented could generate the
same autonomy and identity that Guete Emerita is vested with. However, in Sierras
repetitive performances, characters could be replaced with one and other, and the
meaning would be retained. Since Sierra reflects on the recurring patterns of
capitalist exploitation rather then on a unique event that has only happened to the
people present at the time. Sierras protagonists therefore become metonyms of all
the mass of society enslaved to the capitalist system. The identity of his sitters is
therefore of secondary interest. They sit as nameless bodies, used as tools or particles
of a muted installation. They cannot decide to project a different image than the one
assigned to them, but are instead frozen into a subordinated, passive an incapable
condition. By being stuck in their humiliating situations, they represent the nihilistic
philosophy of Sierras art, and at the same time serve to set of feelings of discomfort
and complicity in the spectator.

As it was previously implied, the leading characteristic of Sierras art is the tension
between a provocative and a nihilistic approach. Sierra on the one hand wishes to
unveil the extreme exploitation allowed by capitalism, but on the other hand he
acknowledges his complicity in enjoying its consequences.

64
Rancire, Emancipated Spectator, 97-98.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 28

The nihilism of postmodern art supposedly contrasted that of the modernist
positivity. According to the definitions given in The History of Modern Art, while
structuralism is built upon the solid belief that precise, distilled forms and categories
can be created by investigating the characters of the individual elements,
poststructuralist epistemology disputes the possibility of pure forms and unity of
language and objective truth.65

Every thinker mentioned in relation with the Postmodern shares the incredulity
towards master-narratives. Nietzsche was concerned with destroying the master
narrative of metaphysics (God is dead.)66, Baudrillard disputed reality (Reality
does not exist.)67 Foucault focused on social order (imposed and integrated norms).
Lyotard (1924-1998) concerned himself with Science loosing its status as master-
narrative.68 Referring to feminist artists, Craig Owens (1950-90) describes
postmodernism in terms of the loss of master narratives.69

Similarly to Foucault, Sierra points at the atrocities of the social order. He Sierra
stages extreme labour relations70 in order to unveil the principles of the capitalist
relation, and show how the labour system actually works71. Sierras unveiling
agency is provocative and vulgar. In 160 cm Line Tattooed On Four People (2000),
four drug-addicted prostitutes are paid with shot heroin to have a line tattooed on
their back. In 21 Anthropometric Modules Made from Human Faeces by People of
Sulabh International (2005-2006) he made people build minimalist blocks from
faeces they collected. In Los Penetrados (2008) he hired couples to have anal sex in
different combinations based on of skin colour and genres.

65
H.H. Arnason and Elizabeth C. Mansfield, History of Modern Art, (Upper Saddle River: Pearson,
2009), 658.
66
Friedrich Nietzsche in Adrian Samuel, Nietzsche and God (Part I), Richmond Journal of
Philosophy 14 (Spring 2007): 2, accessed February 01, 2014, http://www.richmond-
philosophy.net/rjp/back_issues/rjp14_samuel.pdf
67
Violence of the Virtual and Integral Reality, The Intenational Journal of Baudrillard Studies
Vol.2, Number 2, July 2005, accessed on 01 February, 2014,
http://www.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/vol2_2/baudrillard.htm#_edn1 Jean Baudrillard.
68
David Lyon, Postmodernity (Buckingham : Open University Press, 1999), 18.
69
Craig Owens, The Discourse of Others: Feminists and Postmodernism in The Anti-aesthetic:
essays on postmodern culture, ed. Hal Foster, (New York: The New Press, 1998), 65-93.
70
Teresa Margolles, Santiago Sierra, BOMB 86 (Winter 2004), accessed February 01, 2014,
http://bombsite.com/issues/86/articles/2606
71
Ibid.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 29

Jacques Rancire disputes the clear break between modernism and postmodernism,
arguing that modernism has indeed left space for slippage between practices and art
forms. As late capitalism and neo-liberalism is the continuation of capitalism and
Liberalism, Kirsten Gram-Hanssen argues that our society to day should not be
conceived of as something breaking with the principles of the modern society, but be
seen rather as a radicalisation of the modern conditions.72

Provocation in art and culture for example has only escalated since modernity.
Indeed Kester originates provocation of art from romanticism. Goyas portrait of
Charles IV with his Family (1798) served one of the examples of thinly veiled
criticism of the monarchical power [that] would have been almost unthinkable a
generation before.73 Kester continues by saying that in the nineteenth century,
provocation and critique moved from being an occasional or incidental aspect of art
to its primary orientation, with the emergence of a series of avant-garde
movements.74

The slippage between the ideologies of modernism and those of Postmodernism

reflect for example in Baudrillards nihilism. By accepting the universality of the
spectacle and claiming that it is now unstoppable, Baudrillard is hardly questioning
master-narratives. Just like Baudrillard, Sierra is far from opposing the system when
he admits to its universality, and his complicity with it. According to the criticism
that postmodern nihilism is comfortable and reassuring, let alone beneficial for the
system, it might paradoxically be considered as the postmodern version of the
modernist positivity.

Sierras tendency to comment on capitalism through replicating its tendencies

follows the tradition of Andy Warhol. Just like him, Sierra is celebrated both by lefty
intellectuals and capitalist bankers, and like Andy Warhol Sierra enjoys the
advantages of the specular economy.

72
Kirsten Gram-Hanssen, Modern and late-modern concepts of lifestyle in relation to environmental
behaviour (Paper presented at ESA Conference, Murcia, Spain, 2327 September 2003).
73
Grant Kester. The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context
(Durham NC: Duke University Press, 2011), 34.
74
Ibid.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 30

At the heart modern and postmodern conceptual art is the emphasis on the idea rather
then the craftsmanship. This shift from skills to creativity is rooted in the era of the
Renaissance. Before the fourteen hundreds, artists generally did not sign their pieces.
The appearance of signature and the presence of the artist are connected to the shift
from purely pictorial qualities towards the content of the image. In the religious art of
the medieval era the content of art pieces hardly varied at all, and the emphasis was
instead of technique and craftsmanship. Since the Renaissance however, art shifted
from tools of religious admiration towards becoming the product of economy, and
name becomes an indicator of success. In this evolution craftsmanship gradually
faded, and by the time economy and capitalism flourished, it became completely
marginalised. In contrast, name has become a more and more important factor for an
artists success. Today, if one walked in to a collectors office to sell an empty paper
as a piece of art, he would hardly be received well. However, if he that it belonged to
Any Warhol and it proved to be true, he would be able walk out with a million
dollars cheque. Santiago Sierras name was enough for him to finish an artistic
product without any technical effort when he got a homeless person say My
participation in this project could generate $72,000 profit. I am paid 5 pounds.
(Person Saying a Phrase, 2002)

Fig. 4 Dorothea Lange, Migrant Mother, 1936

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 31

This project recalls Martha Roslers criticism Dorothea Lang( 1895-1965), who in
commission by the Farm Security Administration, has created the worlds most
reproduced photograph75. Rosler quotes the woman who Lange photographed
Thats my picture hanging all over the world, and I cant get a penny out of it.76
The discrepancy between the profit generated from the picture and the lack of
compensation echoes the disposition of Santiago Sierras Person Saying a Phrase.
However while the photographic Farm Securitys photograph of the poor woman
who meaningfully gazes into the air is at pains to conceal its injustice, the homeless
man in Sierras project had to recite his blank statement particularly in order to
highlight Sierras exploitation of him.

75
Martha Rosler, In, around and afterthoughts (on documentary photography) in The Contest of
Meaning: Critical Histories of Photography, ed. Richard Bolton (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992), 316.
76
Ibid.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 32

 CONCLUSION

Ethical criticism of Sierras work is considered problematic by Claire Bishop and

Mscar because it focuses on the process that lead to the finished art-object and the
artists relationship to capitalism, rather then the innate political force and formal
qualities of the finished project. The validity of ethical criticism can be confined by
Gabriel Rockhills claim that the politicity of an artwork lies precisely its the social
dimension (the production, distribution, and reception of a work of art).

Sierras honesty about his complicity in fostering capitalism seemingly exonerates

him from the suspect of hypocrisy and propaganda. But what his honesty illustrates
is quite the contrary: it is simply the changing nature of propaganda in art.

Fig. 5: Evdokiya Usikova, Lenin With Villagers, 1959

In Lenin With Villagers (1959, Fig. 5) by Ukrainian Evdokiya Usikova depicts Lenin
while he is visiting the people of the conuntryside, hinting clearly at his devotion to
the well being of the working class. The idyll and the intimacy between the peasants
and Lenin is clear from the open and attentive gestures of the characters. The
painting is a typical example socialist realist painting, a clear propaganda praising the
communist order and projecting a positive image of the leader.

It has been previously demonstrated that American modernist art was supposed to
counterweigh soviet socialist realism, and the provocation and criticism in avant-
garde was exploited as a tool to propagate the cultural superiority of western
liberalism. Following this logic, it is not impossible the provocation and lefty

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 33

criticism can serve the ultimate counterexample of totalitarian propaganda, in so far
as it projects an image of liberalism as a self-reflective order. Criticism, especially if
it does not desire to achieve real change, comes in hand for such propaganda. Sierra
admits that his anti-capitalist art fosters the capitalist system because it pleases the
needs of collectors and investors in fine art. It seems plausible that the triumph of
capitalism is transforming anti-propaganda a form of propaganda for the its purposes.

Sierras honesty about his complicity in fostering the system does not capitulate
criticism. The basis of with Sierras work is not his ethical impurity, but the
inconsistency of both admitting to his ethical impurity and decrying the ethical
impurity of liberalism. All of Sierras characteristics, (provocation and nihilism,
complicity and dereliction, lefty criticism and liberalist behaviour) point at an
inconsistent, irrational and individualist character that links his art to the patterns of
the post-modern culture.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 34

 Attila Jzsef: Humans (1936)
Translated by Vernon Watkins

In our family goodness is a guest.

Interest arranges all things like a host
Foolishly, but the rich were long aware
Of this, and now it dawns on most of the poor.

Every entanglement works loose at last.

While we are sure of our truth and hold it fast,
Our lives gloss over those with bad designs.
A change of setting does not change the lines.

Yet at the top of our voices we all sing,

Borne on the gusto wine and powders bring.
Mouth empty, our spirit sinks: we drain the vats.

He is best who, bearing disillusion, pauses.

We are as full of small and mordant causes
As the murmuring willow grove is full of gnats.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 35

 BILIOGRAPHY
Abrams, Dennis. Ernesto Che Guevara (New York: Infobase Publishing, 2010)
Anderson, P. 1998. The origins of postmodernity. London: Verso.
Arnason, H.H. and Elizabeth C. Mansfield, History of Modern Art, (Upper Saddle River: Pearson, 2009)
Baudrillard, Jean. Forgetting Baudrillard in Social Text 15 (Fall 1986)
Baudrillard, J. On Nihilism in Simulacra and Simulation, (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1994)
Baudrillard, J. Simulacra and Simulations in Jean Baudrillard, Selected Writings, ed. Mark Poser,
(Stanford University Press, 1998), 166-184.
Baudrillard, Jean. Violence of the Virtual and Integral Reality, The Intenational Journal of Baudrillard
Studies Vol.2, Number 2, July 2005, accessed on 01 February, 2014,
http://www.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/vol2_2/baudrillard.htm#_edn1.
Bishop, Claire. "Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics." October, no. 110 (2004): 5179.
Bishop, Claire, in Jennifer Roche, Socially Engaged Art, Critics and Discintents: An Interview with Claire
Bishop." What Criteria should we use to engage socially engaged art? (July 25, 2006).
Bishop, Claire. Artificial Hell: Participatory art and the Politics of Spectatorship, (London: Verso, 2012).
Bishop, Claire. The Social Turn: Collaboration and its Discontents, Artforum 44, (No. 6, February 2006):
179-185.
Campbell, David. and Mark Durden, Variable Capital (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press and the
Bluecoat., 2007).
Choat, S. 2010. Marx through post-structuralism. London: Continuum.
Collingwood, R.G. The Principles of Art (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1938).
Foster, H. 1985. Postmodern culture. London: Pluto Press.
Foster, H. 1983. The Anti-aesthetic. Port Townsend, Wash.: Bay Press.
Foucault, Michel. History of Sexuality Vol. 1: An Introduction, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1978).
Frieding, Rudolf, ed. The Art of Participation 1950 to Now (New York: Thames and Hudson, 2008).
Gram-Hanssen, Kirsten. Modern and late-modern concepts of lifestyle in relation to environmental
behaviour (Paper presented at ESA Conference, Murcia, Spain, 2327 September 2003).
Harvey, D. 1990. The condition of postmodernity. Oxford [England]: Blackwell.
Hier, Sean P, ed. Contemporary Sociological Thought: Themes and Theories (Toronto: Canadian Scholars
Press, 2005).
Kester, Grant. The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context (Durham NC:
Duke University Press, 2011).
Lyon, David. Postmodernity (Buckingham : Open University Press, 1999).
Margolles, Teresa. Santiago Sierra, BOMB 86 (Winter 2004), accessed February 01, 2014,
http://bombsite.com/issues/86/articles/2606.
Martnez, Rosa. C. Medina and S. Sierra, Santiago Sierra (Madrid: Turner, 2003)
Mascar, Pilar Villela. Not in my Name. Reality and ethics in the work of Santiago Sierra in Santiago
Sierra, 7 Works (London: Lisson Gallery, 2007), 13.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. in Adrian Samuel, Nietzsche and God (Part I), Richmond Journal of Philosophy 14
(Spring 2007): 2, accessed February 01, 2014, http://www.richmond-
philosophy.net/rjp/back_issues/rjp14_samuel.pdf.
Rancire, Jacques. The Emancipated Spectator (London: Verso, 2009).
Robb, David. Operation Hollywood (New York: Prometheus Books, 2004).
Rockhill, Gabriel A Specter is Haunting Globalisation in Deborah Hauptmann and Warren Neidich, ed.,
Cognitive Architecture. From Bopolitics to Neopolitics. Architecture and Mind in the Age of
Communication and Information (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2010) 476.
Rockhill, Gabriel. Critique of the Ontological Illusion. Rethinking the Relation between Art and Politics,
Giessen, November 12th 2010, www.thinking-resistance.de.
Rockhill, Gabriel. Translators Introduction in Jacques Rancire, The Politics of Aesthetics (London:
Continuum, 2006), 1.
Rosler, Martha. In, around and afterthoughts (on documentary photography) in The Contest of Meaning:
Critical Histories of Photography, ed. Richard Bolton (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1992), 316.
Saunders, F. S. 2000. The Cultural Cold War. New York: New Press.
Saunders, Frances. Modern art was a CIA weapon, Guardian (1995), accessed February 01, 2014,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html.
Wilford, Hugh. The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America (London: Harvard University Press,
2008), 100-101.

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 36

Maya Nogradi: The Right, the Wrong and the Postmodern 37