Rosler Chapter 4

From Paradise

Jump to: navigation, search


S.R. Why I'm asking this question is, because your practice of art for me always contained a specific perspective on daily life. And in the way, you take daily life as the theme or the issue of your work, of your practice, puts you in a very specific position, maybe combined with a feminist background, puts you in a very specific position in that field that can be called »conceptual«. How do you see the development to that practice, your own development?

M.R. Of daily life?

S.R. Yes, the daily life thing, the feminist thing in relation to the field of so-called conceptual art? ... I mean, let me say one more thing: There were some voices in conceptual art who were working were very strongly for a much more autonomous, as you say in your last, recent essay, Kantian //exactly, absolutely// understanding of art.

M.R. Absolutely. That was precisely that element of conceptual art that most alienated me, it was the art as idea or art simply as meta-discourse. Because it seemed to me, that it literally was elitist in that it was such a highly restricted attention to an aesthetic legacy that it bore no fruit for me in terms of the idea of a more traditional avant-garde approach to opening art to the concerns of ordinary people, including ourselves, and to the questions of life, existence and sociality in general. I was not interested in logical operations. Now I understand that many people who were interested in these logical operations were interested in them because they thought, that that was a good vantage point from which to combat the repressiveness of society, but it seemed to me a bit recherché.


Martha Rosler »