ROBOTIC and SYNTHETIC PERFORMANCE: Steps Toward a Culture of Liberation a Manifesto of the OmniCircus
VII. A METHOD OF ANALYSIS
Any attempt to develop a science of art must start with a technique for examining works of art in their social context. Most previous methodologies resolve into a form/content dichotomy. In the simplistic landscape of 20th century aesthetics, the world is divided into two camps, with the "avant-garde" taking the side of the supremacy of "form" and Stalinist-influenced pseudo-leftists preferring "content". This half-wit battle then takes on all the moral grandeur of a professional wrestling match. Both sides slug it out, the audience reaching a feeding frenzy when the fake blood flows, until they tire, agree to disagree and everybody goes home happy. Since the opposing positions connect in the perfect mirror image, both sides agree on far more than either would care to admit.
I propose a methodology which examines art works in terms of three basic characteristics, and always puts the work in its evolutionary social/historical and cultural context:
TECHNICAL syntax - the patterns of design structure of the art work which flow from the technology used to create it, the technologies referred to by the work, the technologies to which the art work shows allegience, and the technology of the society within which the work was created.
FUNCTIONAL syntax - the patterns of design structure of the art work which flow from the practical activities (functions) directly suggested by the artwork, the practical activities suggested by the work indirectly, and the social purpose of the artwork as defined by the layer or class that owns or controls the means of production of the artwork.
The conflict of relationship between the ritualized technical and functional syntax of a work of art creates its design language, which it can then use to express...
CONTENT - the ideas expressed directly in the "subject matter" of the artwork and indirectly by the underlying assumptions of the genres to which the artworks belong.
When a ruling class begins to inhibit the further development or optimum social usage of the forces of technology in order to maintain the status quo, the narrow interests of these strata become a brake upon history, and a social transformation overturning their rule becomes necessary. This dialectic between the means of production and the modes of ownership of those productive methods is reflected in the language of art and design, the abstract language of the given epoch and society.
It is the conflict between the technological potential of a given culture and the actual way the technology is used by those who control it that gives art and design its basic character. Available technology gives the set of potential solutions, but the design criterion of the class that owns the means of production gives the final solutions. A society which has the technology for a more progressive and advanced set of cultural solutions but doesn't use it, or which misuses a new technology by actualizing only forms which were a function of the old, obsolete technology (mannerism) is in the hammerlock of decadence.
When examining a work of art or a design form scientifically, it is necessary to analyze it in five fundamental ways in order to come to a full understanding of the work and, through this examination, the society that created the cultural work.
1.THE TECHNICAL MODE OF ANALYSIS - What was the technological level of the society that created the work? To what technological language does the work show allegiance? What was the actual technology used to create the work? Was the work created in a society with a different technological base then the one to which the work expresses allegiance?
2. THE FUNCTIONAL MODE OF ANALYSIS - What social class owned and controlled the means of production of the society that created the work? What are the criteria by which the form of the work is decided upon? How is the technology, which creates the set of potential forms, actively utilized? Who decided on the final form? How is the technology of the society that created the work actually utilized in relation to its potential for meeting the needs of its members? To what mode of ownership of the productive forces of the society does the artwork show allegiance? Is there a difference between the mode of ownership to which the work shows allegiance and the actual mode of ownership of the society that created the work?
3. THE CONTENT (or "subject matter") - What ideas are directly expressed in the work? What underlying assumptions or ideologies are expressed by the genre to which the work belongs? Is there a conflict between the ideas directly expressed in the work and the ideology of the genre?
4. THE DESIGN LANGUAGE MODE OF ANALYSIS - What is the relationship in the work between the technical and functional modes? What is the relationship in the society that created the work, between the means of production and those who control them? How does the content of the work relate to its design language?
5. THE DIALECTIC - What role does the class-consciousness of the artist play in this work? Which class-defined social and cultural vision is the artist expressing? What social-political role is that class playing in the context of its society and time?