Page 61 - Studio International - April 1971

Standpoints WARNING envisaged, such as it is known, such as it is
We have chosen for this text the theme
practised—has become the only possible means
`standpoints' (`point of view'). We would, of proceeding along the path of no return upon
Daniel Buren nevertheless, not want this theme to conceal the which thought must embark; and this requires
other implications included in our proposal: a few explanations. This rupture requires as a
form, colour, repetition, difference, effacement, first priority the revision of the history of art as
vulgarization, anonymity, etc.... we know it or, if you like, its radical dissolution
All this—and the 'point of view' — forms the [dismantlement]. Then if one rediscovers any
total proposal. If we have chosen to emphasize durable and indispensable criteria [strong or
one theme, it is none the less true and verifiable essential points] they must not be used as
that the same proposal could/will help us to attainments to imitate or to sublimate, but as a
analyse other themes, notably those set out reality which should be restated. A reality in
below. fact which, although already "discovered" would
It is vital also to re-emphasize that the have to be challenged, therefore to be created.
themes in question are gradually revealed by For it may be suggested that, at the present
the proposal itself, and not the contrary. The time, all the realities which it has been possible
partial theme, the object of the present text, is to point out to us or which have been
revealed only in so far as it is understood within recognized, are not known. To recognize the
an ensemble which is the question of art itself. existence of a problem certainly does not mean
As for the proposal itself, essentially 'visible', the same as to know it. Indeed, if some
it remains to be 'seen' and each manifestation problems have been solved empirically (or by
makes this possible. Attention is then only to be rule-of-thumb), we cannot then say that we
brought to a work evident and visible' in its know them, as the very empiricism which
own terms in the context of each presentation. presides over this kind of discovery obscures
This work/presentation, being systematically the solution in a maze of carefully maintained
repetitive, is specifically different at each enigmas.
exposition. Tut art works and the practice of art have
served throughout, in a parallel direction, to
PREFACE signal the existence of certain problems. This
`We will observe for the record that all the recognition of their existence can be called
works which claim to do away with the object practice. The exact knowledge of these problems
(conceptual or otherwise) are essentially will be called theory (not to be confused with
dependent on the single viewpoint from which all the aesthetic "theories" bequeathed to us by
they are "visible", a priori, considered (or even the history of art).
not considered at all) as ineluctable. A It is this knowledge or theory which is now
considerable number of works of art ... "exist" indispensible for a perspective upon the rupture
only because the location in which they are seen —a rupture which can then pass into the realm
is taken for granted as a matter of course. In this of fact. The mere recognition of the existence
way, the location acquires considerable of pertinent problems will not suffice for us. It
importance by its fixity and its inevitability; it may be affirmed that all art up to the present
becomes the frame (and the security that day has been created on the one hand only
presupposes) at the very moment when they empirically and on the other out of idealistic
would have us believe that what takes place thinking. If it is possible to think again or to
inside shatters all the existing frames (manacles) think and create theoretically/scientifically, the
in the attaining of pure freedom. A clear eye rupture will be achieved and thus the word art
will recognize what is meant by freedom in art, will have lost the meanings—numerous and
but an eye which is a little less educated will divergent—which at present encumber it. We
see better what it is all about when it has can say on the basis of the foregoing, that the
adopted the following idea: that the location rupture, if any, can be (can only be) epistemo-
(outside or inside) where a work is seen is its logical. This rupture is/will be the resulting
frame/its boundary'. logic of a theoretical work at the moment when
If we permit ourselves to use this introduction the history of art (which is still to be made) and
extracted from a text written in July—August its application are/will be envisaged
1969 (see 'Beware' in Studio International, theoretically: theory and theory alone, as we
March 1970, p. 104) for the 'Conception' well know, can make possible a revolutionary
exhibition in Leverkusen, it is because we practice. Furthermore, not only is/will theory
indicated at the time that each of the points be indissociable from its own practice, but
raised was to be dealt with in greater depth or again it may/will be able to give rise to other
taken up later separately. This is what we are original kinds of practice.'
here attempting to do. The extract above is [From the last chapter of 'Beware' (Studio
taken from the section 'The viewpoint—the International, March 197o) entitled: Preamble'.]
location', for it is with these notions that the
following sections are concerned. I QUESTIONS RAISED
[In the following text, passages italicized within One can say that the strong or essential points
square brackets are editorial additions made in [key issues] that mark what by agreement is
order to clarify the translation from the French.] called 'art history' from the beginning of the
`. . . A complete rupture with art—such as it is century until today were in their majority
181