Wednesday, April 23, 2014
 

Nate Harrison, “What would art be without the idea of intervention?”

Our good friend, artist, writer and teacher, Nate Harrison, pens an award-winning essay on the crucial role of intervention in art and the world at large. Here’s a taste,

However, part of a crisis of intervention—increasingly apparent in the postmodern aftermath of 1968—involves advanced capitalism’s inherent ability to absorb the content of critique, and to redeploy it in form only. Capitalism’s talent for self-representation is located in its perverse ability to disentangle expression from operation, and vice versa. We see this in the co-optation of subcultural transgression in the 1970s and 80s (e.g., punk and hip hop) and, more recently, in the jargon of artistic entrepreneurship and creative industries.

Harrison also questions whether Richard Prince’s use of Patrick Cariou’s photographs are truly an intervention, or a complex form of post-Fordist capitalist production. Harrison sides on the side of the latter. He also wonders, correctly, whether Google’s amicus brief (friend of the court statement) in support of fair use in the Cariou v. Prince lawsuit was in fact more self-serving than philanthropic.

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments

No comments so far.
 
Legal

Clancco, Clancco: The Source for Art & Law, and Clancco.com are trademarks owned by Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento. The views expressed on this site are those of Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento and of the artists and writers who submit to Clancco.com. They are not the views of any other organization, legal or otherwise. All content contained on or made available through Clancco.com is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed, nor is anything submitted to Clancco.com treated as confidential.

Website Terms of Use, Privacy, and Applicable Law.
 

Switch to our mobile site