Paste your essay in here… The emergence of oppositional art was influenced by ‘politics, protest and principles’ (Sigmund, 2014). Central to oppositional art was the resistance to the already established hierarchies and traditions within practice. When the dominant, social and political ideologies run parallel to its potential to reconfigure social orderings’ (ref——), artists from revolutionary movements such as Arte Povera and Mono-Ha turned to low cost materials and models of participation to ‘undermine critical and cultural authority’ (ref——). I will examine and discuss the implications of the ‘new panorama of forms and pronouncements’ (ref——) of materiality and what is enabled through this change in perspective, of the resorting to materials beyond the traditional ones of painting and sculpture. I will seek to explore the rejection of such hierarchies and ideologies and how this lead to creative liberation through the use of outdated objects and unconventional approaches, through material and immaterial realms.
Arte Povera was a movement born in response to the ‘elitist modernism that dominated the art world at the time’ (ref——) amidst the political protest movements of the late 1960s. It refused the established hierarchy and more archaic tradition of painting and the artists sought to broaden the ‘terrain of visual culture as a global phenomenon’ (ref——). Determinant to disrupt the historical narratives, the artists pursued a ‘profound language of rebellion and resistance’ (ref——) through the employment of organic, industrial, ephemeral materials and primal processes. Arte Povera adopted new ‘poetic combinations of undisguised raw materials and industrial elements’ (ref——) including wholly perishable materials such as wood, coal, glass and industrial leftovers to evolve with the time. Their adoption of poor materials into their practice supported the idea of their accustoming to labour as a valued currency. For instance, Mario Marz, an installation artist from this period renowned for his structural igloos, incorporated materials ranging from glass and scrap metal into his primitive structural forms. The prominence of this process places emphasis on the ‘spatial perception over the materiality of things’ (ref——). By responding to specific environments, Marz was able to withdraw indigenous materials and work within the context of spatiality on the site.
The use of poor materials was similarly adopted by Mono-Ha, a pioneering movement established in Japan in the 1960s. Their disapproval to technological modernism inspired a practice where the artists ‘explored materials and their properties in reaction to what they saw as ruthless development and industrialisation in Japan’ (ref——). The dynamic shift from the role of a creator to a re-arranger saw a juxtaposition with industrial versus organic materials to reflect and interact with the ‘existing architectural space’ (ref——). At that time, the U.S art market prioritised American artists and therefore a low demand was placed on works from the Mono-Ha period. The subjective value of art could be measured by certain aspects including quality, exposure and mastery of the media. Due to the perishable nature of the materials, their pieces were often destroyed. Despite the remaining limited supply for artworks from Mono-Ha, there is a current market for it. Its ongoing demand allows for an aesthetic experience and understanding to be cultivated through the works ‘physical components and then through an intellectual engagement with materiality in the broad sense, through time’ (ref——). The ‘sculptures of chance that are revealing of the materials used, invite the action of reflection in the viewer and the artist himself’ (ref——). As a result, the interaction between the viewer and artwork is reinforced, respected and reverenced. Through this change in perspective, value is placed on the role of the artist and the positioning of the viewer in relation to the work.
In rejection to the values held by the ‘commercialised contemporary gallery system’ (ref——) is Australian installation-based artist, Mikala Dwyer, who came to significance during a ‘period of increasing economic unrest, political conservatism and identity politics’ (ref——) in the 1990s. Influenced by Arte Povera, her works were constructed from cheap, disposable materials including soil, plants and wool. A distinguishing piece entitled Square Cloud Compound (2010), constructed from large fabric cubes to resemble clouds, was an ‘experimental and experiential architecture that plays with the permeable and changeable nature of objects and our relationship with them’ (ref——). The significance of materiality and process was an establishing feature on her craft and expertise. ‘In a contemporary context, materiality is understood to be a relic of the artists process of investigation into the nature of things, through aesthetic juxtapositions’ (ref——). Dwyer was then able to communicate through to the viewer through her vibrant, striking installations and engage through the ritualistic and magical qualities of such.
In ‘The Aesthetic Dimension’ (ref——) Herbert Marcuse, a German-American philosopher and political theorist, argued the ‘political power of art came from its aesthetic dimension, and that overt political content was too literal an intervention’ (ref——). The function of art within social contextualisation was to radicalise consciousness and its potential to define what what real. Marcuse continues, ‘a work of art can be called revolutionary if, by virtue of the aesthetic transformation, represents the prevailing unfreedom and the rebelling forces,’ (ref——). Art can be seen to achieve liberation and the power to give definitive responses to a ‘reality which is suppressed and distorted in the given reality’ (ref——). Through the ‘repressed potentialities of man and nature, the work of art thus re-presents reality while accusing it’ (ref—-). This encourages an aesthetic evolution through images, material and language. In this sense, ‘the achievement of the aesthetic form, the fictitious world of art appears as true reality’ (ref—-). What can be drawn from these principles is an establishment of truth in experience, in confrontation and comprehension. Marcuse states, 'Art's separation from the process of material production has enabled it to demystify the reality reproduced in this process’ (ref—-). There is a divorce from the role of materiality within production which governs its ‘own language and dimension of affirmation and negation.’ (ref—-).
In an age of digital production and technological change, there is a significant shift in material choices. Translating into immaterial realms, ‘direct experience is s——-d in favour of the dispassionate superficiality of the immaterial, digital realm’ (ref——). It could be argued that there is a devaluation of aesthetic experience through the digitisation of craftsmanship as its relationship with the viewer is diminished. This suggests that information can be provided to engage through a mediated platform, however the understanding one inherits from experience cannot be translated as easily. Conversely, aspects of materiality are affected by the mode in which an artwork was produced; either by hand or by program. The term poverty, in this case, could suggest or hint an absence of artisanal skills, or lack thereof. Regarding the more commonly digitisation of media, the models of participation have seen a shift from more traditional understandings of practice to aesthetic valuation. On the one hand, its ubiquitous influence is to bring a new found respect the cultivation of immaterial craft. In the Tangibilities of Form: Skill and Deskilling in Art After the Readymade, John Roberts brings light to the term Deskilling and how ‘technological reproducibility’ (ref——) eliminates the ‘artisinal competence of the artist and aesthetic valuation’ (ref——).
Through material and immaterial realms, there is a constant challenge of ‘Hegemonic ideology- that is, dominant beliefs or ways of seeing the world’ (ref——). Pioneering movements towards the late twentieth century including Mono-Ha and Arte Povera challenged the established categories of ‘refinement, value and expertise’ through an employment of materials with substandard status. There was a degree of refinement from the disregard and opposition to recognised traditions to the pivotal importance of creative deliverance. Through this change in perspective, creative individuals were respected for their laborious process of both manual and intellectual expertise. Their utilisation of low cost materials and models of participation supported a more accessible approach to art making. The liberal understanding of the framework, fabric and form of their commonplace materials is characteristic of their intellectual engagement with aesthetic experience and materiality.
In opposition to this,