If you are struggling with the First Assignment

I've spoken individually to most of the class about the first assignment, in one form or another. Something that comes up fairly often is the perception that not having mastered the theory we have read is somehow a problem - either a problem with the student or, if not with the student, perhaps with the class itself. I on the other hand do not see this as a problem at all. 

The North Star of the class - the goal toward which I want us to move - is an increasingly subtle understanding of the same theoretical concepts we have already introduced. The practice happens by grappling with theory in different instances, even arguing with it, approaching it with a questioning mind. A subtle hand with theory takes practice, and it takes this kind of disagreement, the willingness to change your mind, not taking anything for granted as the authoritative truth. It takes practice to use the power tools of theory not to bludgeon defenseless artifacts into submissive signification within a total interpretation but - on the contrary - to see how, all around us, in every area of human endeavor, theory is already being used, all the time, for all kinds of purposes. To practice theory in an integrated way is to be aware of the uses of theory, to denaturalize the hidden uses of theory, such as how master narratives eat away at historical knowledge, continually revising and eroding it to convert the "common sense" version of that history into soundbytes in the service of the powerful; to see how vulnerable art is to the many forms of capture and also how resilient it is; to see that something can be both captured and capturing, both avant-garde and popular, and that these identities depend on perspective and are not set in stone. To see that "minor literature" is about what it does, rather than what it is. To arrive at an integrated practice of theory is to be able to see different points of view at once, and allow multiplicity rather than needing it to all signify in the service of one interpretation - much as Tevye does by mixing registers (Yiddish and Hebrew, second-person, first person, reported dialogue, etc.) and - on the contrary, many critics want to capture Tevye to "mean" and embody their particular interpretation of "modern Jewish identity" and nothing else. 

The first assignment is not where you do all these things. Rather it is the first of several (yes, admittedly obligatory) opportunities to think with theory, to try it out wherever you are in a process of learning about many new things. Thinking with theory, or practicing theory, is more like driving a car than solving a puzzle. The assignment is not supposed to show everything you have learned, nor are you expected to form a definitive opinion on any of these things, but rather to take it out for a spin and see what happens.

I am very much grading the assignments based on what each person is able to do rather than based on what they didn't do or "should have done." I think you will all feel better once the first assignment is done with and you receive my feedback as well as the dreaded grade (the latter of which is, as you probably already suspect, merely the institutionally mandated analogical translation of what you have done as if all class work across all disciplines in the college existed in perfect analogues of each other). 

Let me stress that I view the assignments as a progression through the semester, and that I don't expect you to engage with theory in the same way in the first assignment as in the last. I consider it a learning process, and the assignments are meant to be a way of both articulating and deepening the learning process. They are not meant to be finished, total products with airtight arguments, or anything like that. If you were learning to play the piano, would you expect that your first performance would be at the same level as your third? Please allow yourself to learn, and be compassionate with yourselves. I promise to be compassionate with you as well. In short, this is a somewhat meandering pep talk. You can do it!

Capture in the News

I thought it might be useful and fun to create a platform where we could discuss theory off the cuff, outside of class. It is purely optional, non-graded, and not something to worry about. 

It could be a place to put late-night thoughts about theory that you might not remember otherwise. It could be a place to connect your individual content interests with the critical framework of the class. It could be a place to ask questions and hear each other out about whatever might be percolating, but with (perhaps) less of a sense of pressure about getting off a fully-formed comment during class time.

I'd like it to be a place where it feels relatively safe to put out ideas that aren't fully formed. If you have suggestions about how to make it more of such a place (such as using a different platform, or changing the settings on this one), I am open to making changes.*

So here's what I was thinking about with theory today:

Protest at the Guggenheim Museum

The Guggenheim Museum in New York incarnates (in its distinctive architecture) and continually reaffirms its programmatic relationship with the avant-garde.

I mean, look at it.

At the same time, the history of the museum is a history of capture. (In fact, I don't know of any famous museum that isn't primarily about capture, although there have been avant-garde attempts at museums that could be about flight, dispersal, non-authenticity, such as the Virtual Museum of the Avant-garde). 

The foundation that originally housed a "Museum of Non-Objective Painting" in rented quarters in the late 1930s has become a mammoth global art institution, its brand identity remaining quintessentially "New York" yet its name ever-expanding to grace new museums opening worldwide. It has spawned "sister museums" elsewhere - in Bilbao, Venice, Berlin and Abu Dhabi.

The protest above - staged accidentally (but appropriately) during an exhibit on the Italian avant-garde movement known as Futurism - called out the museum for the disconnect between its ostensible/original artistic mission and its current practices. In order to do so, the protestors make visible this disconnect, and in doing so they reveal the nature of the museum as an apparatus of capture.

banners are dropped

pamphlets flutter down

At the same time, their protest also resignifies the museum as an avant-garde space. Some museum-goers were undoubtedly excited to see a takeover of the museum during an exhibit of the (historical) avant-garde, to see the disruption of the capture, or its fruitful incompleteness, to experience the unruliness of the avant-garde erupting even as its historical meaning appears to be sealed.

After I finished writing this, I realized that oneway to think about this blog - and about what it means to theorize - is as a practice of translation. Translating the news, current events, or other aspects of the everyday, into the terms of theory. Many of you are already doing this mentally - I can see it in class - and it could be helpful to read about how it is for others and articulate how it is for you.

*I am going to try to make everyone in the class an author of the blog. If I have understood the FAQ correctly, that means that you can also change settings on the blog. Please feel empowered to go ahead and do so. Right now the blog is "public" but we could set it to "private." We could also talk about having the blog be public vs. private.