He transcrito algunos fragmentos que me parecen interesantes del libro Postproducción de Nicolas Bourriaud, a ver si podemos discutirlos un poco.
Cris
POSTPRODUCTION. Nicolas BOURRIAUD
-´Postproduction analyzes a set of modes of production (…)´ (p. 8)
-´(…) citation, recycling, and détournement (…) reexamine notions of creation, authorship and originality through a problematics of the use of cultural artefacts (…) artists´intuitive relationship with art history is now going beyond what we call “the art of appropriation” , which naturally infers an ideology of ownership, and moving toward a culture of forms, of constant activity of signs based on a collective ideal: sharing. The Museum, like the City itself constitute a catalog of forms, postures, and images for artists (…) that everyone is in a position to use (…) as tools to probe the contemporary world. (p.9)
- ´Postproduction is a technical term from the audiovisual vocabulary (…) it refers to the set of processes applied to recorded material (…) a set of activities linked to the service industry and recycling (…). Since the nineties, an ever increasing number of artworks have been created on the basis of preexisting works; more and more artists interpret, reproduce, re-exibit, or use works made by others or available cultural products (…) contribute to the eradication of the traditional distinction between production and consumption, creation and copy, readymade and original work. The material (…) is no longer primary (…) originality and even creation are slowly blurred in this new cultural landscape marked by the twin figures of the DJ and the programmer, both of whom have the task of selecting cultural objects and inserting them into new contexts. (p. 13)
- ´(these artistic practices) testify a willingness to inscribe the work of art within a network of signs and significations, instead of considering it an autonomous or original form´. (p. 16)
- ´How can we produce singularity and meaning from this chaotic mass of objects, names and references that constitutes our daily life? Artists today program forms more than they compose them: rather than transfigure a raw element (blank canvas, clay, etc.) they remix available forms and make use of data.´(p. 17)
- ´(…) DJ´s, Web surfers and postproduction artists (…) are ´semionauts´ who produce original pathways through signs. (…) The semionaut imagines the links, the likely relations between diparate sites. (…) to listen, to record becomes work in itself, which disminishes the line between reception and practice, producing new categories of knowledge. This recycling of sounds, images and forms implies incessant navigation within the meanderings of cultural history (…)´(p. 18)
- ´(…) the contemporary work of art does not position itself as the termination point of the “creative process” but as a site of navigation, a portal, a generator of activities (…). (p. 19)
- ¨The artwork is no longer an end point but a simple moment in an infinite chain of contributions. This culture of use implies a profound transformation of the status of the work of art. (…) What if artistic creation today could be compared to a collective sport, far from the classical mythology of the solitary effort?. “It is the viewers who make the paintings,”, Ducahmp once said, an incomprehensible remark, unless we connect it to his keen sense of an emerging culture of use, in which meaning is both collaboration and negotiation between the artist and the one who comes to view the work. Why wouldn´t the meaning of a work have as much to do with the use one makes of it as with the artist´s intentions for it?´(p. 20)
