When I was born, in the mid nineteen eities, I wasnt aware, but I would say that there was culture, and counter-culture, and there was a tangible seperation between them. Int he nineties this changed. There was a faster turn-around for something to shift from being alternative, to floating to mainstream visibility. I think at about the same time supermarkets started doing racks of CDs and tapes of independant music. This might seem like a banal detail, but I see it as a significant cultural indicator.
The same thing happened to the artworld. A group of individuals appeared, like Duchamp ready-mades, who never enjoyed years of obscurity, but arrived complete (I’m talking about the so-called yBAs). The whole format was contrived by art insiders from the beginning, and pre-approved by the establishment, while the mainstream media played the part of the schocked spectator, contributing to the pretense that this represetned something fundementally ‘experimetal’.
By the end of the nineties, the artworld has become industrialized, it had cast away its experimental tendencies, while philosophers pondered were the ‘avante garde’ has dissapeared to. The original experimentalism of conceptualism had become merely provincial, and a new artist would have to ‘get it right the first time’, for the sake of a tangible career in this industry.
While all this was happening, the Internet was bubbling away. Its important to note a distinction. The mainstream worked ona pyamidal command structure, the art world included. Everything is based on hiearchy. Even mainstream ‘News’, as it is presented on TV, is essentially a hiearchical prioritisation of stories. The Internet has no such hiearchy. This has had some interesting and possibiliy unexpected effects. In amongst the porn and the banality, you have some very intelligent people. Qualified people. People who worked in government, people with information that cannot be found within the mainstream, coming forward and telling what they know and laying on the table, for all to see, on the world wide web. There is no prioritisation, it is simply there, ready to be found.
If you sift through this information I speak of, read through it, verify it, cross-reference it, you will come to a fundementally different view of reality, as it is presented by the mainstream. For example, Hitler was a stooge placed in power by the British military intelligence. For example, the bombs that rained down on London in the blitz were made by IG Farben, was American owned. For example, after the war, main players of the Third Riech were inducted into the US, and Soviet governmetns where they were paid to continue their work, setting up large-scale pan-national organizations such as the UN, FAO, WHO, IMF, organizations that are made up of unelected officials which have been dictating policy to indiviudal governments since the war ended, whose collected state goal is to gain complete control of global food production, natural resources, and kill off three fifths of the human race! These are not conpsiracy theories, these are fact. Verifyable, Not up for discussion, STATED in their published documents, which are PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
We weren’t told these thing at school, with its establishment-approved curriculum. Were we lied to? No. Because ALL of this information that I’ve mentioned is PUBICLY AVAILABLE. We weren’t told this these things because it would compound the said agenda. For all intents and purposes, Germany lost the war, but the Nazi’s with the help of elements within Britian and the US, inhereited the world. There is a findemntal different between the view of reality as its presented in the mainstream, and the view of reality that you arrive at once you connect the dots from information that isnt made explicit, yet is available.
Now, the artworld can’t process these things, because it has shed its vanguard impulse, and remains within the tight borders of the mainstream. I have questions and need answers about my reality that the that artworld has cast off the responsibility to ask and search for.
So you have the artworld, which ihas fused into the mainstream in rejection of vanguard, and there is the viewpoint based upon information put out by the internet, which you could say is a ‘the true vanguard’. There is another layer in all of this. You have to be mentally blind not to recognized that, crudely spekaing, things are getting crazier and crazier! What Was once occasional, is now an everyday occurance. Look at seismic activity, like at sunpot activity, look at weather patterns, societal change, policy change, fashion, music, nuclear meltdowns, economic events, wars, the list goes on! Its getting nuttier and nuttier, the spiral is tightening, the nuttiness is increasing and the rate of nuttiness is increasing. Can you feel it?! People are itching after something, we’re living at the edge of out seat. Understandly, it always feels like this, but the thinking person has to accept that things are getting more audacious, year on year, by simple recollection. The crash of ’08 was a break in the market, we’re about the see the crash of whole countries: Greece, Italy, SPain, Portugal, France, germany, UK, the US, the world.
The thinking person has to ask, where is all this going? Nothing running at an exponential rate can last forever. We are about the hit the knee of the curve, and this does have a conlusion. It might not take the form a singular event on a single day, on at single hour, but one must conclude the simple fact that things cannot go on as they are.
And on the other side of this conclusion is something dunfementlly different than before. Certain things cannot be saved. Mainstream media doesnt make it,
and the white-wall gallery system doesnt make it.
The white wall gallery system (the industrialised art world) doesnt make it by virture of the fact that it doesnt see this conclusion comming, and so its own fracturing takes it by surprise! The art world takes its cues from a particular philosophy. This philosophy repeats the denialist notion that ‘life goes on’. The idea of a ‘historical conlusion’ is too religious an idea for the aesthestic philosophy of teh art world.
The other reason why the white wall gallery system does survive is becasue its cannot grasp the very reason why I’m talking to you: Talking about eh consluion actually edges us all closer to the conclusion. As my words leave my mouth and enter your head, I’m bringing new awareness and this irrevocolbly changes the game. You may forgot everything ive said, but supbconsciously you’ll change your adjective you use int he everyday, you’ll do thing differently. This is empowering. The art world takes its cues from a philosophy is which you are fundementally dissempowered, words are a mere construct, language is disseptive. No! Langhuage is desives, and I know, as a talk I breathe life into my ideas.