LAVEART-The Dismeasure of Art Written

8/13/2019 LAVEART-The Dismeasure of Art Written

1/14

SonjaLavaertandPascalGielenTheDismeasuref ArtAn interviewwith PaoloVirnoIn his home own Rome, talianphilosopherPaoloVirno talks withphilosopherSonjaLavaertandsociologistPascalGielenaboutthe relation betweencreativitYandtoday'seconomics, ndaboutexploitationandPossibleormsof resistance. irno is known forhis analysisof Post-Fordism; isview that the disProPortion fartistic standards uns parallel tocommunism, owever, s newtothe philosophyof art. Hebelievesaesthetics ndsocialresistancemeet n a quest or new forms.Politicalart or not, the contentshardly matter.


2/14

Theart u,orldhes displaAed arid intel.cstn yo10 1totko.t)e1-lhe pastJelr ed1s; 'c allrseLuesrc het? to intetl)ie1r . to Jotatt aft magazifte.Yet ou't)e nNIA lrTi1tcn lJthingc.tpl ic it lyabout or1. Wharedo lou lhiltk this inlerest in uour u)ot* coDLcsIt's true. I sometimesget nvited to talk about arl at confercncesor seminarsorganizedby art academies nd that always embar-rassesme a little, as f therehas bcen sone mistake,becausemyknowledgeof modern aft is actuallyvery limited. I think that peopleinvolved n art being nterested n my work has something o do witha concept use,namely virtuosity'. In my opinion, his concepl sthc commongroundbetweenmy political andphilosophical eflection and the field ofart. Vifiuosity happens o the anist or performerlvho, after perfomring,doesnot leavea work of art behind. haveused he experienceof the performing,viftuoso artist not so rnuch omake statements bout art, but rather to indicatewhat is typical ofpolitical action in general.Political action does not produceobjects.It is an activity that doesnot result in an autonomousobiect. Whatstrikes me is that t{xlay work, and notjust work for a publishingconpany, for televisionor for a newspaper, ut all prcsentday work,includingthe work done n the Volkswagen actory, or at Fiat orRenault, ends o be an activity thal does not rsult in an autono-nous'work', in a producedobject. Ofcourse the Volkswagen actorycranksout cars,but this is entirely subject o a systemof automaticmcchanizedabour, while the duties ofthe individual Volkswagenfactory workers consist ofcommunication that leavesno objectsbehind:of this t}.I)eofvirtuoso activity. I seevirtuosity as a modelfor post-l'ordistwork in general.And there is morc: what strikesme is that the earliest we of virtuosity, the one that precedesallothers,precedeshe dance, he concerl, the actor'sperformanceandso on, s t ?ically the acti\'ity of our human kind, namely he use oflanguage.lsing human anguages an activily that does not result inanyautonomousand renaining 'work'; it does not end in a matedal

result,and this is the lessonDe Saussure,Chomskyand Wittgensteintaught. Post-Fordistwork is virtuoso and l becamcviri.uosowhen tbecame inguisticand communicalive.wlral.do I think aboutan? The only art of which I havea morethansuperficialknowledge s modernand contemporarypoetry.I think that the expeience of avanl-garde ft includingpoetry nthc 20thcentury s one of dispropoftion and of'excess', of lackof moderation.Grcat 20th-century vant-garde ft - and poetry nparticular- from Celan o Brecht and Montale.hasdemonstratedThe D isineaslo'e ol Arl 7i)


3/14

the crisis of experientialunits of measure. t is as f the platinummetre bar kept in Paris o define he standard ength ofa metresuddenlymeasurcd90 or ll0 centimetres.This emphasison immod_eration, dispropoftionand the crisis in units of neasure is to becreditedgreatly o avant-garde rt and this is alsowhere il edgesupto communism.With regard o the crisis of measure, rt is a lot likeconrmunism,OII?JpoetrV. ol other afl as 10ell?Afi in general, expect,but I kno$'poetry best lt is about dispropoftion. In additionto explaining he crisis,poetry wants o lind newstandardsof nreasure nd proporlion. Along the same ines the maiorItalian poet and critic FrancoFortini has said hat there s an obiec-tive commongroundbetweenavant-garde rt and poetry andthecomnunist movelnent and I do not use he term 'communist' n thesenseofactual socialism.What'smore, consideractual socialismas nterpreted r'ithin the communistparty and the SovietUnion ascommunism'sworst enemy.This emphasison the disproporl on or c sis of units of Nea-sureis prescnt n lhe communistmovementandthey are looking for newcriteria, too. The expeience of the artist performer canprovide uswith a generalpost-Fordistmodel.Whatclogolt mcon bg 'ct is is oJ hernit oJmeasurc'?It is as fthe metre, he standardset to measurccognitiveandaffective expcrience,no longerworks. We see he samecrisis in thefietdsof politics and history:socialprosperity s no longerproducedby laboLrr ime, but by knowledge,by a genemlknowing,by 'genemlintellect', and a-s result socialprosperityand labout time are nolongerdircctly connectcd.The new standard o measureprosperityis $'ithin the domain of intelligence, anguage nd collabomtion.Theproblcn is that socialprosperity s still measuredby the old standardoflabour time, while realitieshavechangedand it is actuallydetcr_mined by'general ntellect'. Wc can see he same hing happeningn2Oth-century r1. t demonstrateshe inadequacy f the okl standardsand suggests,n the formal sphereandthrough the formal work ofpoetry, new standards or the appraisalof our cognitiveand affective expedence.This is a point that brought he artistic avant-gardeclose o the ndical socialnlovenrentand in this sense here s a kindoI brotherhoodbetween he two: they would like to explainthat theold standardsare no longervalid and to look for what might be new


4/14

ne$,public sphere, 4'hichhas nothing to do $'ith the state?Avant-gardeart provedthe impotence, he inadeqlla(y, he disproportionofthe old standards hrough a fornal investigation.The commongroundof art and social movements s neverabout content, Artthat relates o social rcsistance s bcside he poini, or Ether arlexpressing dewson social resislan(e s not relevant,The radicalmovemenland avantgardepoetry touch on the fornlal invesligalionthat yiclds an index of new fornls denotingnew waysof living andfeeling,which results n new standards.All this is far removed rom asubstantivc clation.SoAouseconllJ t . lbnnalpaml. l?l?)o lJou hi k lherc s a h.istoricenl l l l io i thisJonnalparul lel islnand cotr lLelc c an?Jnl?tac-l io beh|een onn and (ontent?No, When t comes o (ontenl, there is no cornmonground.Themis only contact with regard o form and the quesl for forms. To me, tis purelya malter ofa formal investigation.Thc fomr ofthe poem slike the forn of a new public sphere, ike the slruclure of a new idea.Looking for fornls in the ans is like looking for new standardsofwhat we nlay regardas society,power,and so on.

Yes,exactly, t's abollt new rules.This collapseofthe old rulesand anlicipating neu' rules, even f only formal, is where aestheticsand social resistancemeet: his is the commongroundwherea newsociety s anlicipated hat is basedon'general intellect'and not onlhe sovereigntyof thc statc anymorc.I)o gou nrcan:' .r ies a olganize hc standanl?It is a nutter of definingconcepts: he concept ofpower, ofwork,of ac(ivily and so on. [n connection$'ith aft I lr'ould like to add, andthis perhapsgoeswithout saying, hat after Benjaminwe cannotbut wonder whal lhe fale of lechni(al ability to reprcduce s goingto be- n our presentcontext $'e need,aestheticallyand politically,a concept f 'unici ty without he aura'.Youboth know Bedamin'sconcepl of the unicity ofa work of art involving he 'aura',a kindof religious cult surrounding he anwork as s for instanceevidentin the caseoflhe Mo,rl /,lsrl. Beljamin pointsout that the aumis desl.royed y reproduction echniques: hink about fillrl andphotography.

Theproblenl we face today s the problen of the singularity ofexperience,which has nothing o do with aum or cull. To grasp he


5/14


6/14

Or take what philosophers all the 'indiriduation principle ,meaning he valuation ofeverything that is uniqueand unrepeatablein oul lives. Speakingof indi\'iduation mplies thal you consider heindividual a result, not a starling point. The ndividual s a resultof a novement that is rooted n the 'commrmal'andyet is, or isbecoming,parlicular. [t is Marx who, for'general intellect', uses heterm 'social ndividual'.We canpostulate hat the geneml s sone-thing pre-individual,a kind ofgeneral consciousnesshat existsbefore ndiliduals form, and from \ahich hey form. This genemlpre-individual s a 'we' that exists before he different I s develop,so is ol the sum of all I's. This is also n perfect agreementwiththe view on humandevelopmentofthe Russianpsychologistandlinguist Vygotsky,who was actually heavily nfluencedby Marrr:priorto anythingelse here exists a collectivesocial context and onlybeyondand from that context does he child develop nto a separaleindividual subject.Or renember the formidable discoveryof the'mir-rorneurons'by lhe neurosciences, hich tells rls there is a kindof generalsensing,an empathy hat preccdes he constitutionof theseparate ubject.The talian scientist Gallese,who contibuted tolhis discovery,speaksofa space n which the'we'is centml. I thinkall theseexprcssionsby Vygotsky,MaIx and Galleseare differentways o grasp he conceptofthe generalas opposed o the conceptof the universal. would like to highlight his contrast,which is ahard nut that both political movcmentsand arlistic researchwillhave o crack. The alliancebetween hc generaland the singularopposes he state and its machinery.Today,movements hat sidewith the multitudes carefullyanticipate his alliance: he multi_tudes are individualswho neverthelessmaintain strong ties withthe general.On the other hand, he state and post Fordist societytransform he general nto the universal; hey transform he generalintellect nto a sourceof financialgainand social collabomtion,andvirl.uosity nto pattemsand slmctures ofpost-Fordisl production.Ret nt ing to theen|c( l Ion betu,eett attdpol i t ics:hou'do Jou.feel bonlcngoged rt ,Jol i t tsto ceabout1r 'hat | i4n Holtnesdoesot 'Midtelongelo isloletto d l t is Ci l tadclar le Fondoziot lePislolel lo?Ho11'do oltJeeluboul art thal Idkesup o substanl iDepol i t i (al slandy)inl as u'ell? s i t tel .erot ?In this context I would like to talk about he SituationistsandDebord, or they providean exampleofan aftistic movement,Debord nd 5' i fura/ iott isteto' t tol iot tale,uming nto a pol i t icalavanFgarde. o nlc, engaged rt is an ntegralpart ofpolitical move_Thc DisntP, 's tc i f .4t l 77


7/14

ments,one ofits components.Political movementsuse a lot oitools,including meansof communication ike the Internet, andpoliticallyengaged ft is oneofthose tools. It is a componentofmovements'political capital.Yet I would onceagain ike to underline hat the most impotanteffect ofart is set n the formal sphere. n that sense,even alt thatis remote from political engagementouchesupon the social andpolitical reality. The two are not conflicting matters.They operateondifferent levels.The formal investigationproducescriteria, units ofmeasure,whereas he directly political engagement fthe artist is aspecific orm of political mobilization.

Do Aoumean to saA that e1)erLoliti.cellAerqaged art is sti[LpartoJ a Jon\al in1)estigation?Engagement s closeLg onnecled o asucces JuL ot'mal i n Lt s i ga io n?Yes.what I mean s that even artists who are remote from thepolitical movementmay, through thefusearch or new forms andexpressions nd n spite ofthemselves,get n touch with the needsofsuch a political movement,and may be used by it. Brecht aswellaspoetsmuch more rcmote from social realities, ike Montale, ealized a similar relation.The Situationistswere very important whenthey becamea political movement,but from that moment on theywereno longer avant-garde ft: it's about two modes ofexistence.They clearly llustrate this double ake.Before 1960 hey were anartistic movement ooted n Dadaismand Surrealism.afterwardstheyparlicipated n social resistance,making he samemistakesorgaining he samemerits as other political activists.Anotherproblemis that when language ecomes he mainprinciple according owhich social reality is organized, ocial reality as a whole becomesaesthetic.So rlhere r]ould lJousituate art roilhitt societgJrom a socioLogicalpetspe.cline?Or pul. the olher u)aAarourtd,:What would happs i.Iarl u,as cut t7r[a?Jrorn societA? Whal sociaL oLedo Aou ascribe Io.fiction ilL societA?Well, think that Enzensberger'suip is appropriatehere.He saldpoetry s no longer found in volumesofpoetry but scatteredoversociety ike an effervescent ablet dissolved n a glassof water. Youwill find art everywhere,even n commercials.There s no longer amonopolistic ocationfor the productionof art; the artistic experi'ence s molecularly disseminated.We also ive in a time, the post-Fordist era- n which human nature has becomean economicstake.

Precarious Er isterrce


8/14

Every aspeclof hunun nature (ihat wc are inguisticbeings, heelfect of en\ironment on the hunan species)constitutes aw matorial for produclion.The debale abouthunan nature hat took placebet\, eenFoucault an(l ('holrsky in Eindhoven n 1971$'asveryinportant to me.This debatewas at the heart of the social rlovemerrts'delibemtions rom lhe moment ts translationwas publishedin Italy. You couldsay both parlies $'ere &rong. Fo[cault dcniedtherewas any such thing as nnatehuman mature, 'herea-slhomsky's concepl of this innate humannaturewasso rigid and detelnlillistic that he thoughthe could dedtlcea political progranlme ronit. I bclier this disctlssionought o become he subiectof rcneu'e(lstudy and that wc need o have t again, o find new answers ocontemporarf/ llestionsaboul the rclation betweenhuman natureandpolitics, You see, oday aspectsof htm:rn natule havebecomesociok)gicalcategories.One example s flexibility. Anthropologistslike Gehlcn cach that the hallmark ofhuman nature s the absenceof specializednstincts:we are the specieswithout a specificmilieuAnthropolos/ usesnotions such as natural,unchanging ruth'but,parlicularly in our day andage,such natural truths havebecornesociologic(l trulhs and the phenomenonof flexibilily and sub-phenomena,ike migration,alongwith them. Another exarnple:wehuman beingsalways emainchildren. we hold on to certain childlike aspectsour cntire lives,wc are chronicallychildlike. This, too,hasalwaysbeen ruc but only now has ifelong earningbecomeanissue.Yet another examplc: he rI|eiahistorical rspeclhat we arehighlypotentialcreatures.n the presenlc(}Iriext, his potentialhasbccorne abour power. Fron1 his perspcttive \ e can spcak of bio-polilics, becausebiological eatureshavebccomea sociological ale-gory - that is lo say,a sociologicalcategoryof capitalism. no $'aydo I nlean o say that flexibility and capitalismare sociological awsofnature. Nolhing stipulates hat society ha-s ot to bc organizednthis way, on the contrary.There s an acstheti( basecomponent nhuman naturc which, in thc prese l context, has be(ome an aspe(lof ccononricprodtction. Thal is why mattershave o be dealt withon a f[ndamental level.The conceptof labour power also ncludesan aestheti( component,besidea communicaliveand a linguistica-spect. he problemofand for arl, both intrinsi(rallyand formally, sto show this aestheti(component )[ he production process DoescontenDoraryar.t ndeedreprescnt his widesprcadaeslheticdimen-sion ofpresent-dayproduction? cannot ansuer this question,but I( lo hink t needs o be asked.Humannaturc, esthelic omponenl,post Fordism. abourpower: the discussionabout ar1needs o be1'hcDisnl .as f t " [ At l 79


9/14

aheld in this conceptualconstellation.What s left of aestheticsnpresentdayproduction n the collaborationand n the commumca-tion that havebecomeproductionpower?Something ransformedthe extraordinaryposition ofthe aestheticexpeience within society'for it is no longerextraordinary,singularand separate ut has,conversely,becomean integralpart ofproductionLet's go bocka litlle, to Enzensberyet''s uip (rnd theplaceuhereot is produrPr l . ops untPlh igt ;kPnt l is t icoulonomAPris longntorr , 'Do or l is l i .d l lu oulonontous lnr?spr ' ic l lI think so. but not asmanyas there used o beSo is it still possible ot art to remain ilisengaged?Cdn art be,'esistcltce arLderodus?I think it can.Linking the terms I usedbefore to this question:the land of the pharaoh, rom which the exodus akesplace, sthe universal.The exodus s awayfrom the univer"salowardsthegenenl, however his occursamong he phenomenaofthe presentcontext.The exodus nvolves he transformationofthose verypresentphenomena.Nothing s external' here s no outside Theexodusoccurswithin post-Fodist prcduction where linguisticproduction and collaboration,as abourand productionpower'createa public dimension hat is not identical o the dimensionofthe state. t is an exodusawayfrom the stale and its machineryandtowardsa new public space hat makesuse of general ntellectandgeneralknowledge.During the exodus he general ntellect no longerhas he power to prcduceprofit and surplusvaluesbut becomesa political institution. What comes o mind is the space n which ac;ntral 'we' is a realisticbasis or a new political institution l thinkthe pre-individualdimensionand the featuresofhuman nature hatpost-Fordismput to work andconverted o cash(flexibility, chroni-cally childlike,no instinctiveorientationor specificmilieu) alsogiveus he upponunity o crealenelt fol- lns.ul in a manneropposileowhat happensn today's nstitutions an exodus hat provides whatwe can seehappening n post Fordismwith a new form' Flexibilitytherefore,but intelpretedas freedom The chronicallychildlikeun.lerslood sprospcri lyon condil ion hat l slofs lranslorminginto the necessity o leam lifelongas describedby Richatd SennettAn exoduswithin the present andscape.It i6 generallAund.et looaLhat post'Fo|distu'$ breakthroughd$a gbbal prodttctiottpri/t(iple tookplace in the 1960s tnd 1970s80 Open2009/No.l7l,4PtecariousE,tisterrce


10/14

logethc|u, i lh lhe stud?nt e\ol ls and th(,Fial stikes. Da Vollthirk thal priot to that t i rne therc etc aft:os L0l enked skinds aJsocial abotnto es br t l l i .s raductionpt.ocess?otrcukl so l hat irnmalcr[ol about (amn.ertced t,h.enuc]t l t tTpentet 'cd is urinal i theNe 'yot.kc.r l t ibi t ion.Would. o.u ulrpat.ttlLehlJpothesis hot th? laboQtories of tlle pft.s?nt postFot(lis tatt to beJbund n artistic produdion i.tsel l , a|. t iculaj l ieatl nTod(rn rcadyfnadeorl? Max Web?tshotl,cd hat the spit.ilql capi lel ism is (Leeplu.rootedn pl.otestanl isrtr.Cah uo.u ntl i -cole ocali.onsof d art isl i ( : , ct i l l iousot subcull t . t1l ol. t1t.e)nsocicl / , 1t his Webcrian r histolical sens. ' , rherc r.epat.at ionsa1?b(ing rnade iD postFor.dis,tas a mental stt .u( lurc?You meana genealogy f post,l'ordism? .ouldbe very interested n a genealogical empe(tir-edaling back further than theMti0sand 1970s. think we could regard he culture inclustq,ofthc l 130s nd 1940s nd onwardsas the laboratory or post Fordistproductionthat anticipated hat which was embodied n industry ingencral n the l9E0s.Whatrould ?Jo1ronsider exenfles o.l he lgj1s (ult:lt1? irtrlustt..ll?Radio, ilm . . . to me, hey anticipatepost-Fordism or tcch_nlcal reasons:at that time, the unexpectedbecomesan indispensableelemenl n the culture industry.The unexpectccl,which laterDe(omcs he pivot ofpost,l'ordist production in the form of theJasai,r-ai'[? invcnlory strategy.There s no culturc industrywithout anoutside-of he-programne aclor. AId lhat renlindsme of \4,hathetwo greatphilosopherso(iologistsHorkheimerand Aclornowrotc intheir chapteron cullure induslq, of their, ialekt k d?t. Aldkl(it.uIg,culturc, ioo, becane an ind stdal se(tor and a capitalistassemblyline bul one wilh a handicap, or it $as not fully rationalyet. It is thishandicap,not bcing able to Ioreseeand organizeevcrylhing,$,hichtums the culture industry into a post-Fordist aboratory.The cultureincluslrv s the antechamberof prescntdayproduction techniques.For u'hal escapes rogrammes s, indeecl,hat elcnlentof flexibility.And o[ ( ou6e I also see hat anli( ipation becausehe cu]ture ndus_try's basematerialsare language nd irDaginal.i()n.TodalJ. ,a ceefiisti( ?.t:pt?ssionsltd aditit ies simpll l b(,ings uatcdol l l tc cenl)eof posl-|. ' t )rdist(:anou. J.lLink bout,.l()t.i ns a n e, a l i sl ( e,r?fessiors ill ( om Drc.( a s a (1.-e11s ngbul oLso fu)uI hc ino'ccl iblc rolt th el thc cultul.ator( l ( , l .ca-t i t)e ltdustries.At.t ,ot t t t leestctcatiuit , has notb?en ocial l lJIh.eDisn( asut el-At ' t 8t


11/14

mafgi.nal,ujhiclL ras tto*^Michel (te Cerledusau then Jor a longIime. yet e1)eiWitlgenslein attd lJou Jourseuplace (:tcdtlxe spacein themaryin ot as gou call it, ort o siddtack' Miglrl the discl'epanc betueenma|gin and ce tre nol beobsolele?I seecreativily as diffuse,without a pdvileged centre As ano'matter what creativity,underweak leadershipfyou call callit that, havingno specific ocation,connected o the fact that wehumansare inguistic beings:art is anybody'sDoes reetixitA tronsJo|m 'hen it is at the cenlre of lhe postForrlistproiLuction sgstem?Or, rnore conclele: is therea dilfet-ence tetT[eerLo'eatir)e thi .keror afiist on(I d ueb designet'or apublicitl c1:pertat the centreo.f he econonic process?Are thesettt:o kirtis o.f creatixit , or is it about the samekind oJ 'rcatilJita?This is a complexdialectic.First' it is important to post_Fordistcapitalism hat creativity developsautonomously, o it can suDse-quently catch t and appropriate t. Capitalismcannotorganizereflectionand creativity,for then it would no longerbe creativity'The form appliedhere s that ofthe ghetto: Yougo on and makenew music,andthen we will go and commercialize hat new music'It is imporlant for creativity to have autonomy,becauset forms inthe collaboration hat is generaland consequentlyhe oppositeofuniversal.Creativity eeclsoff the general l would like to elucidatethis throughthe distinction Marx madebetween ormal and realsubsumptionor subiection. n the caseof formal subsumption' hecapitalistappropdatesa prcductioncycle that alreadyexists lnthe caseof real subsumption, he capitalistorganizeshe production cyclemomenl by moment Now it seems o me that the existentpost-Fordism n many cases nplies th't we haveretumed to tbrmalsubsumption. t is importanl for socialcollaboration o produce tsintelligenceanclcreate ts forms.Afterwards' hat intelligenceandthose orms are capturedand incorporatedby the capitalist' whohasno choicebut to do so ifhe wants o acquire hat which canonlygrow outsideof him or outsidehis organization So he capitalists-wantto seizeautonomouslyand freely produced ntelligenceandfornrs: o realizea surplusvalueof course,not to realizegreaterfreedom br the People.A certaindegreeofautonomy or freedom s necessary nd there-fore permissible.Socialcollaborationhas o bc somethingwith an order to be productive n a


12/14

l t ) g

I

l l r t

s i rr

ihe perspcctive of the capitalist, the work needs to some extent t{ )be established through solf organization. It is ditlicult to grasp thiscon\tex dialcctic by using thcoletical categodcs. That which isrcally produ(tive from an econonic point ol vieu. is not the sum oflhe indivirlual labourers' output, but lhe context of collaboration an(lintcraclion - provided that it lolb1r's its own logi(. of grolrth. inlcstigal ion and nvcntion lo so e cxtcnt. In otherwords, theprocessissubjcct to olrr own initiativc. I1 is a (.ondition tbr my exploitation thatI prqhlce intelligcnce and collabomtion, and I can only do so when Iam, to some degree, frcc. So I nee(l to be granted a certain degrce ofalrtonomy in order to be exploitcd.

Catt lh? nlth o.f hc aulononous arl isl bc see es a (apital istFirsl and foremost I ihink about thc autonomy that is functional increating surplus value, the autononly lhat is essential to innovationand to lhe optimization and developmcnt of collab()ration. This is apatented and themfore a regulatcd autononly, *.hich is absolutelyvital when labour hds becoNe linguisli( and communicative. Althat time, speaker workers must be pemritted aulonomy. In Wittgensteinian terms il is a matter of'language gancs' being used as asource ofprocluction. Language games do not.iusl exist, thcy nced1()be devcloped and ihal is impossible wilhin a rigid structure wil.hall scntences and dialogues pre-recorded and scriple{1. LanguagegaNes presumc sollr degree o[ frcedorr or.aulortomy. Howevcr, I don{)tsharc he view lhal lhe presentconlexl inchldcsntore f ieedonrand prospedtv. A grinding poverly reigns in post-Fordisnt. The \4orst

p{)verty you can inlagine, for it is communication skills ihenlselvesthat are claimed, exploited, and as capital, too.Nt) tha 1t? a ft l a k ng a bou c.lplo u () pc|haps trc n i thladd)ass l t( t tu.sl ion ofhot[ lo l i t thl i l . TodaU n Roni, v sau'postc)s displaU?d bU h? optosit ion.l |al l t t i g th( sbgdn ' l l lanrc)tubi l i to. 1l ppru) iato o' . Whclh?t ar not thatc is nobi l i l lJ il ( tboltt tclnains lo b? sk|, bul u 'eal l ag]c(, hal I / / . precadat ise (a dit ion ta at\) id, a q) i tul i t tg c.t l [oi lat io . Wc rg?ntl lJn?p(I. lb|rns ol t(sistunn,, dcrclolx'd blJ d lbt ' l rccar iaus 1t.o)k?ts'o)prec:rr i .Wrdl is lJaur lak? oI st ( l t . lamts el t?sislorrc? At.? hel l ,i ) t kacping u.i lh irhal uou said eatl i?t. lbrn6 o.l i . l .? Can thcl j htatt istIc ?.tpt?ssionsas u.el l?Co lJou (onc]cl izc lhisLet's take fhe ei{an\)le of soncone who \t()rks for Italian televi-sion and radioi thousands ofpeople \ .ith an unclcar and insecureThcDistn?as rc el ,\ t t


13/14

status . . . are being exploited. They form a so-calledprecarior. Theyhave o work a lot, work hard,be inventiveand focusedall the time.They do not makea lot ofmoney, are employed or three monthsand then unemployed or six more. How can thesepeopleorganize?Not in the workplace:now you see hem therej now you don't. As arule, TV and mdio'sprecdri are well-educated reativepeoplewitha lot ofcultural baggage, dch cultural and social ife: tlpical post-Fordist workers. However,what applies o them also applies o anyexampleofaprcdriot, including Alitalia's. Developing orms ofresistance rom, for and by theprecdd mears doing so within thevery brcad context in which they live their lives. t means nvolvingevery aspectoftheir lives, heir placeof residence,he places heyspend heir leisure, heir communicationnetworks. You cannotorganize elevisionpeoplewithout involving he districts they live in.You cannot abstract rom the theatres hey visit. In short, the wholeproblem concernsso manyaspectsandvital dimensions hat devel-oping a form of resistancemeans nventingnew institutions.How shouldI concretize his? How do we invent new institutions?What can the forms ofresistance of theprecori look like? This is ofcourse he big X on the Europeanpolitical scene.Politics n Europemeans inding thepr?cQ?'iolorms ofrcsistance.There s a prec-edent,an exampleperhaps or this problem, n the IWW, ndust alWorkers ofthe world. At the beginningofthe 20th century no oneknew how to organize he mobile migrant abourers n the USA,either.They were highly scattered, ery mobile and their resistancedid not look as fit could be organized.Yet for about ten years heIWW managed o put up their seemingly mpossiblestrugglewithsome success. heir importance herefore shouldnot be underrated,even f they did lose n the end andget massacred. erhaps oday,we ought to look in the samedirection, o a new kind ofunion thatwill find a new form of resistance. he strike no longerworks. Weneednew lorms that are much more linguistic and creative,muchmore collaborative.Theprecori are the extremeproductof the bigcity er?erience and ofpost-Fordist capitalism.That is why theyarea foothold for the onsetof reflection.Organizinghem meansorgan-izing ives and there s no model for that. It cannotbe donewithoutinvestigatinghe districts they move around n, their circuits ofcultural consumption, heir collective habits.Theprecdrj are actu-ally the social ndividual, herefore hey are alwaysmore than one,they are the counterpaftofthe'general intellect'. But organizing hesocial individual is very hard for, as I said, they are more than one,scattered,a brittle faction. We needresearch.Philosophy, ncluding


14/14

eye.

I

v

ln,lel-rs?II

the philosophy of language, has to concem itself with the issue ofwhat resistance forms may be developed staxtingfrom theprecari.This is not a technical pioblem, on the contrary, it is an ethicalmatter and also an axtistic matter. It is an institutional problem.Orgax.izingthe precani witl mean flnding new institutions in thebroad sense of the word and the opposite of state sovereignry. Themeasure of resistance today depends precisely on dedication to thism4or objective.This is m abrtdgd vBion oltne i.bPiew wiih Paolo Vimo.The .onpleb texr is lvailable at

Thc Di.smeasure of Art

Documents

LAVEART-The Dismeasure of Art Written