Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Value of A General Model
Value of A General Model
At the outset I would like to make a plea for clarity and consistency in the use of
terminology. In my view, it is unfortunate that the expressions 'art history' and 'the
something different from the history of art. Art history is the name of an
intellectual, theoretical discipline whose object of study is the history of art. [An
example from the sciences will make this clearer: astronomy is a science that studies
the cosmos using ideas, theories and data acquired by physical instruments such as
telescopes.] Although the phrase 'the history of art' indicates that there is a single,
homogeneous object of study, in practice art history never supplies us with a single,
complete, homogeneous account upon which we can all agree. There are always
multiple histories, various histories of art. These histories are the output, the
products of the discipline art history. They are physically embodied in various
languages, media and forms of presentation; for example, lectures with slides,
A whole talk could be devoted to the problems involved in specifying the object
of study of art history. Suffice to say, art history is not merely concerned with
studying artworks, styles, genres, artists, patrons, the concept of art, taste, etc; these
would be the objects of study of an artologist. The object of study of art history is
the history of all these things. In short, art history is a branch of the intellectual
discipline history. It is time art historians started to pay some attention to the
the continent (e.g. the work of the French historian Fernand Braudel [1902-85]).
Another talk could be devoted to the idea that art history generates a particular
kind of discourse, and to the problems caused by its representation of the object of
study in particular languages and media. I leave these topics for another time.
artistic signs model and to evaluate its usefulness for art historians. Before looking
at the constituents of the model I want to make some general, preliminary remarks
concerning the model and the reciprocal relationship between production and
consumption.
The bulk of art-historical literature consists of 'partial' studies in the sense that
there are studies of artists, works of art, patrons, dealers, styles, periods, national
schools etc, etc, but what is lacking is a general account of how all these particular
studies inter-relate and, taken together, constitute a coherent totality. The diagram
entitled 'A general model of the production, distribution and consumption of artistic
signs' is intended to display, schematically, the system as a whole, and to show the
where a particular study belongs. It also enables us to identify those topics which
currently receive little attention from scholars. Such a model is not without its
limitations; for example, it does not explain how radical social change comes about.
should explain, was designed with modern Western society in mind (1800 to 1980),
a tribal or a feudal society (for instance, the emphasis given in the model to the art
will find other faults in discussion - it seems to me that the model has a general
validity through time and cross-culturally because the activities of production and
consumption are so fundamental to human behaviour and to the reproduction of
the human species. (Some may object to the terms 'production' and 'consumption'
in relation to art on the grounds that they are redolent of modern manufacturing
unwelcome. There are alternative terms, for example, 'creation' and 'experience' or
'reception' - but they are not so apt. In any event, it is not the verbal tag by which a
process is known which matters so much, but that the process is described at all.)
fairly autonomous system, although it is obvious that these processes take place
about art within society, not art and society.) Any specific historical study using the
model would need to make explicit not only the boundaries or frontiers which
ensure art's relative autonomy but also the connections between the micro system
and its encompassing macro system. (An act of censorship upon an artist or a film is
a simple example of the way in which an external authority can exert pressure upon
the practice of art, thus momentarily cancelling its relative autonomy.) Various
production - such as feudalism or capitalism - but this does not mean that they
contradictory relationship may exist between the two spheres. For example, a
handicraft artistic mode of production typical of feudalism can persist into the era
anachronistic.
It is well known that in orthodox Marxism art is conceived of as part of an
over-simplistic model needs to be amended to take account of the fact that although
realm, it also has a material, technological and economic base specific to it. Thus
we should envisage:
where art is conceived of as overlapping the division between superstructure and
base.
For the purposes of exposition and clarity the two processes of production and
recognized that in practice the two processes are interdependent. As Marx explains
with distribution and exchange, are simply separate moments in a totality, a cyclical
consumption; it creates the latter's material; without it, consumption would lack
an object. But consumption also mediates production, in that it alone creates for
products the subjects for whom they are products. The product only obtains its
'last finish' in consumption ... because a product becomes a real product only by
being consumed.’
Furthermore, each process includes its opposite; that is, in the course of production
labour-power, tools and raw materials are used up, 'consumed' (Marx calls this
the raw material for a second process of production in which it is used up. It follows
the viewpoint adopted: pigments, from the viewpoint ofthe painter, are materials of
production; but from the viewpoint of the paint manufacturer the painter is a
consumer of pigments. Despite the duality of the two processes, Marx is inclined to
assign priority to production, in part because production 'produces not only the
A final point about production, that is, to emphasise its social character.
and talking to one another. In this model, therefore, works of art are conceived of as
people.
Notes on diagram
the centre distribution, and on the right consumption. The horizontal axis is that of
time. Each process takes time and the sequence of events is logical: production
comes first, then distribution, then consumption.
2 To indicate the relative autonomy of the art micro system within the macro
elements of the diagram, e.g. the financial resources used to fund art, may well
feedback dotted lines which reveal, for example, the influence of the taste of a
4 The diagram begins with the assumption that there is a social demand for art
commission on the part of a patron, or it may take the form of an internal need to
5 During the phase of production a labour-process occurs at the end of which there
is a product of some kind. The art-making labour process involves various factors:
social demand, a labour force, material and ideological resources of various kinds.
labour and specialization, need to be trained, hence the inclusion of academies and
art educational institutions. Artists also develop various professional and trade
7 Resources have been divided into three categories: first, material, that is,
premises, raw materials, tools, technical skills; second, financial (capital, income,
8 The labour theory of value should be of use in analysing the production and
distribution phases, explaining how art works gain use-values and exchange-
9 The distribution phase is simple enough. It is concerned with the means by which
art works are disseminated and circulated. Works of art are physically distributed,
demonstrate the links between the economy of art and the general economy of a
society. Analysis is also complicated by the fact that certain works appear
10 The consumption phase. (This phase covers the area of scholarship German
the emotional and intellectual responses of people to works of art. As indicated, the
public for art is not completely homogeneous - there are specialists and laypersons.
response of art historians to works of art. To reveal, for example, the way in which
they apply techniques such as content analysis, formal, stylistic and iconographic
12 Finally, it is assumed that art has the capacity to influence people for good or ill;
general, i.e. it does not reveal how the concept 'art' itself emerges.
3 Perhaps one needs several models to indicate the co-existence within capitalism
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was first published in the magazine Block no 9, 1983, pp. 73-76. In
turn it was based on a paper prepared for a conference on Art History held at
book Design History and the History of Design, (London: Pluto Press, 1989).
Clearly, it is a development of the earlier art history diagram. The main difference
between the two is the addition of another vertical column - production (2) -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John A. Walker is a painter and art historian. He is the author of many books and
articles on contemporary art and mass media. He is also an editorial advisor for
the website:
"http://www.artdesigncafe.com">www.artdesigncafe.com</a>