(Re)thinking Critique: Transversal and Ethico-Aesthetic Dimensions in Partaking Practices

The article examines critique in relation to current theories pursued and addressed in contemporary art and activism. The conception of a “partaking critique” seeks to conceive critique beyond universalising abstractions and totalising gestures. By reformulating critique as a partaking practice, we set ourselves in relation to the current demands and urgencies of a world that must confront the challenges of climate change, migration flows, inequalities between the global north and south, and the mistrust of democracy. We find it important that critique results not merely in a judging and condemning analysis and the division between correct and false. A “partaking critique” deals with historical conditions and traditional formulations of critique. Critique as a partaking practice is situated, local, transversal, and reparative, and thus mobilises dispositions to act in a panorama of neo-liberal mechanisms of paralysis and paranoia. We developed our understanding of critique based on our engagement with critical examples at the crossroads of artistic and activist practices, such as Colectivo Situaciones, which in the scope of this article can only be briefly presented. We queried, shifted and transformed the concept of critique employing discourse analysis and a close reading of critical (queer)feminist concepts of the late 1980s. The perspectives taken by Donna Haraway and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick allow us to place the focus not on negative critique but on instituent and transversal processes, and thus on rethinking the transformative potentials of ethico-aesthetic practices. The current socio-political and ecological challenges require a thinking that transverses and queers traditional valorisations of critique: we do not offer a universal, objective and strong theory, but instead favour categories of partiality, situatedness and responsibility. Critique as a practice of partaking is communicated not as the judgement of a critical subject, but in, through and with instituent processes as well as in materialities.The article examines critique in relation to current theories pursued and addressed in contemporary art and activism. The conception of a “partaking critique” seeks to conceive critique beyond universalising abstractions and totalising gestures. By reformulating critique as a partaking practice, we set ourselves in relation to the current demands and urgencies of a world that must confront the challenges of climate change, migration flows, inequalities between the global north and south, and the mistrust of democracy. We find it important that critique results not merely in a judging and condemning analysis and the division between correct and false. A “partaking critique” deals with historical conditions and traditional formulations of critique. Critique as a partaking practice is situated, local, transversal, and reparative, and thus mobilises dispositions to act in a panorama of neo-liberal mechanisms of paralysis and paranoia. We developed our understanding of critique based on our engagement with critical examples at the crossroads of artistic and activist practices, such as Colectivo Situaciones, which in the scope of this article can only be briefly presented. We queried, shifted and transformed the concept of critique employing discourse analysis and a close reading of critical (queer)feminist concepts of the late 1980s. The perspectives taken by Donna Haraway and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick allow us to place the focus not on negative critique but on instituent and transversal processes, and thus on rethinking the transformative potentials of ethico-aesthetic practices. The current socio-political and ecological challenges require a thinking that transverses and queers traditional valorisations of critique: we do not offer a universal, objective and strong theory, but instead favour categories of partiality, situatedness and responsibility. Critique as a practice of partaking is communicated not as the judgement of a critical subject, but in, through and with instituent processes as well as in materialities.The article examines critique in relation to current theories pursued and addressed in contemporary art and activism. The conception of a “partaking critique” seeks to conceive critique beyond universalising abstractions and totalising gestures. By reformulating critique as a partaking practice, we set ourselves in relation to the current demands and urgencies of a world that must confront the challenges of climate change, migration flows, inequalities between the global north and south, and the mistrust of democracy. We find it important that critique results not merely in a judging and condemning analysis and the division between correct and false. A “partaking critique” deals with historical conditions and traditional formulations of critique. Critique as a partaking practice is situated, local, transversal, and reparative, and thus mobilises dispositions to act in a panorama of neo-liberal mechanisms of paralysis and paranoia. We developed our understanding of critique based on our engagement with critical examples at the crossroads of artistic and activist practices, such as Colectivo Situaciones, which in the scope of this article can only be briefly presented. We queried, shifted and transformed the concept of critique employing discourse analysis and a close reading of critical (queer)feminist concepts of the late 1980s. The perspectives taken by Donna Haraway and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick allow us to place the focus not on negative critique but on instituent and transversal processes, and thus on rethinking the transformative potentials of ethico-aesthetic practices. The current socio-political and ecological challenges require a thinking that transverses and queers traditional valorisations of critique: we do not offer a universal, objective and strong theory, but instead favour categories of partiality, situatedness and responsibility. Critique as a practice of partaking is communicated not as the judgement of a critical subject, but in, through and with instituent processes as well as in materialities

Affekt(de)regulierung durch Affizierung

Affect(de)regulation by AffectionThis article starts from the assumption that the critique of representation is fundamental for a critical conceptualization of affect. In this regard, theories discussed in the tradition of Spinoza are crucial; they connect affect with a reflexive moment and at the same time determine it as a fundamental affection preceding the subject. As a result of this perspectivism,  affect can be associated on the one hand with artistic practices, on the other hand it can be characterized as a co-evolutionary process of individuation between technique, organism, and the world. By trying to connect a critique of representation and affect theory, this contribution takes into account the current interest in affect – not in order to follow the myth of immediacy, but to render conceivable a critical attitude that includes the interrelation of reflexive-cognitive and affective-physical moments

Affekt(de)regulierung durch Affizierung

This article starts from the assumption that the critique of representation is fundamental for a critical conceptualization of affect. In this regard, theories discussed in the tradition of Spinoza are crucial; they connect affect with a reflexive moment and at the same time determine it as a fundamental affection preceding the subject. As a result of this perspectivism,  affect can be associated on the one hand with artistic practices, on the other hand it can be characterized as a co-evolutionary process of individuation between technique, organism, and the world. By trying to connect a critique of representation and affect theory, this contribution takes into account the current interest in affect – not in order to follow the myth of immediacy, but to render conceivable a critical attitude that includes the interrelation of reflexive-cognitive and affective-physical moments

Ephemere Differenzbildungen in Serie

Zu Beginn der industriellen Massenproduktion und vor dem Zeitalter des Klons stand Serialität nicht für identische Reproduktion, sie verschränkte vielmehr Ordnung und Variation. Durch diese begriffliche Fassung von Serie war es möglich, dass sie nicht allein Mittel der Standardisierung und Gesetzmäßigkeit war, sondern mit ihr auch Varianzen und Differenzen formuliert werden konnten. Kunstgeschichtlich manifestiert die Serie - exemplarisch kann hierfür Claude Monet stehen - grundlegende konzeptionelle Veränderungen in der Auffassung von Kunst: Auf der einen Seite macht die serielle Darstellung deutlich, dass die bildende Kunst sich von ihrer repräsentativen Aufgabe emanzipiert hatte. Das Bild war fortan keine "Form 'natürlicher Malerei'", sondern eine Übersetzung, eine Transformation, die sich einem Wechselspiel denkerischer, technischer und darstellender Prozesse verdankt. Bild und bildnerische Verfahren werden erkennbar als künstlerische Verfahrensweisen, die auf je spezifische gesellschaftliche, zeitliche und ästhetische Anforderungen reagieren und diese einbeziehen. Auf der anderen Seite sind mit der seriellen Darstellung aufgrund ihrer Reflexion der Relationen der Elemente zueinander eine Spannung zwischen Offenheit und Geschlossenheit, eine Verräumlichung von Zeit und ein Umschlag von Diachronie in Synchronie verknüpft. Die Serie in der bildenden Kunst kann als eine Figur charakterisiert werden, die Konzepten der Identität, der Sukzession und linearen Entwicklung konträr ist. Insofern verwundert es nicht, dass in den 1960er Jahren, in denen das Interesse an seriellen Verfahren, Ordnungen und Produktionen erstarkte, das Prinzip der Serie zu Reformulierungen und Verschiebungen des Kunstbegriffs beigetragen hat

Taking Sides : Theories, Practices, and Cultures of Participation in Dissent

publishe