Page 39 - Studio International - April 1972

mathesis universalis' of Leibniz and others. The would at some point become one of the objects between (e.g.) 'minimalism' and 'conceptualism'.
suggestion is that within subscription to the of the inquiry. But once given this then the There is also a relationship as a matter of
`paradigm of ontification', i.e. the rules governing the character of the inquiry expository hermeneutics. The latter
essentialist/material character/physical-object will change. If one looks at ontification as relationship is, however, hardly expressed in
paradigm (hereinafter E/MC/POP), the 'form' paradigmatic, then the rules established in this positivistic—reistic terms. Expressing it that
of the subscription is volatile. That is to say paradigmatic way are unquestionable, for one way would just be an indication of a failure to
that the notion of volatile 'form' is cannot both treat a set of rules as paradigmatic recognize that a mere stylistic gives one no
observationally grounded in the trek through and also questionable, but only so long as the purchase on the features of the map. The
material forms and 'physical-objects', e.g. paradigm itself is presupposed. And the allegation of a continuity on the basis of an
paint, stone, steels felt, slime, gas, etc. of paradigm will only be not presupposed after untenable historiology (supporting the view
which, for example, the work of Pollock, something like a sense of 'crisis' (this may that a methodological anomaly with respect to
Reinhardt, Johns, Judd, Andre, el al. can be attach in a strong way to the notion of 'interest') one paradigmatized structure ipso facto becomes
seen as exemplary. This is the constitution of has been evoked. A new direction in art is a paradigm for an alternative) is just silly.
the on-going inquiry in the aspects of the inaugurated by a growing sense, often restricted Predominating univocal ontology tends to
post-war American work apposite to these to a narrow subdivision of the artistic shore up this kind of allegation. If we allow that
remarks. The primary question here is, how community, that an existing paradigm has object-making art is to be called normal art,
does it come about that the E/MC/POP is in ceased to function adequately in the then it is only through the practice of normal art
any sense in question in the first place ? The exploration of an aspect of inquiry which that that the professional community of artists
suggestion here is that the incursion of such a paradigm itself had previously helped to evoke. succeeds, first, in exploiting the potential
question into the modem tradition is no The sense of malfunction is what leads to scope and precision of the established paradigm
capricious arbitrary act generated by a simple `crisis'. What is then forming are the logically and, then, in isolating certain difficulties
quest for novelty, and this is not to imply that prior conditions for the emergence of a more or through the study of which a competing
the quest for novelty is always capricious or less rudimentary competing paradigm, and paradigm may emerge. The suggestion is that
arbitrary. The suggestion is that what is called eventually the possibility of the occurrence of it is especially in beginning the latter process,
above 'the trek through materials' etc. is seen what Kuhn calls the paradigm-shift.5 that of 'isolating the difficulty', that some
as a central and crucial direction within the On this rests another important point. In post-war American work can be seen as
modern tradition, and that this direction has more specific terms one generally allows that, pre-continuous with some parts of the
provided both rules of coherence and rules of for example, Pollock's contribution may have Art-Language programme. It is appropriate
consistency for the inquiry to consider the been prima facie ontic, but this is not here to note something about the
presupposition of its own paradigm (i.e. ideologically vacuous : finally it has to end up as incommensurability of competing paradigms. It
E/MC/POP). But one simply cannot ask, with ideological. The ascent or descent then through appears that the proponents of competing
full force, a fundamental question concerning the ranges of ontification has ideological paradigms practice their trade in different
whether or not the E/MC/POP is either the significance. The astonishing autonomy which worlds. It may be said that both the classical
best tool or the only tool for extending the is accorded the ontification principle is itself object-making proponents and the so-called
inquiry by making an object, insofar as making (an ideological) paradigm of art. more `abstract' conceptual' proponents look
an object constitutes full-blooded subscription What is here called the autonomy of object- at the same world and what they look at has not
to the E/MC/POP. This in its turn presupposes making treats of this activity as if it holds, in changed. But in some areas they see different
that object-making is a superstructure and the art domain, the status of a moral things and they see them in different relations
beyond law. One cannot even ask whether or command/natural law. It is the case that to one another. Thus someone looking at
not subscription to E/MC/POP is essential in object-making has been a conditional imperative Pollock or Judd from the classical object-making
terms of making an object because the question of art, but it could not at all be capable of being position will presuppose object-making and
is ruled out of court by the act of making an a moral command, that is, it has never been count Pollock or Judd, consistently, as
object. It would be rather like trying to answer capable of holding the status of a categorical object-makers reinforcing the entrenched
whether quantum mechanics is a viable imperative. But the autonomy thesis of paradigm (i.e. the E/MC/POP), whilst someone
competing paradigm to Newtonian mechanics object-making holds the activity to be who can see in the programme of Pollock and
by only using Newtonian mechanics. The ideopathic, i.e. in the sense of it not being Judd the suggestion of questioning the
answer would always be in terms of Newtonian consequent upon anything else. From the entrenched paradigm (E/MC/POP), will count
mechanics and one would simply have never holding of this view it follows that a further them as just that, object-makers asking
had quantum mechanics; therefore the thesis is held, namely, that it is the duty of the questions through the act of object-making
formulation of the question would never be artist to make objects. (One is reminded here of about the paradigmatic status of object-making.
possible. The praxis of the 'trek through the distinction Kant draws between the The above situation may entail that a direction
materials' inquiry has amounted to questioning principle of the Autonomy of the Will and that that cannot even be demonstrated to one group
the terms and propositions that are logically of Heteronomy.) One of the most relevant of artists will perhaps seem intuitively obvious
prior to the terms and propositions which are aspects of some post-war American work is that to another group. In its clearest form the
peculiar to the successively entrenched material whilst overtly adhering to the autonomy thesis, situation becomes polarized, and the
systems of art. This has meant an ascent or its infra-structure operations were turned upon incommensurability of the competing
descent (if we can avoid for the moment the status of the autonomy thesis itself This, paradigms is explicit. Then, before they can
suggestions of value judgements) through the providing we are, and one assumes we are, hope to communicate at all effectively, one
axiomatic systems entrenched at successive prepared to allow Pollock, Johns, Reinhardt, group or the other must experience the
periods. Perhaps a glib epithet for the 'trek Judd, et al, some propensity for attempting to conversion that was earlier called the
through materials' praxis would be 'an attempt understand what they are doing, should come as paradigm shift. Once in one or the other of the
at presupposing no material axiom'. To a surprise to no one (but it apparently does). If polarized positions such a transition, insofar as
reiterate; the ascent (or descent) has been then there is a continuum between the direction it is a transition between incommensurables, is
through ranges of ontification axioms. of some post-war American work and some part likely to occur all at once or not at all. But it is
It seems that, given the impetus of this of the Art-Language programme it will rest not suggested here that the recent developments
inquiry and some possibility of it being upon analogical complexity.6 (There is, in art constitute an all-over polarized situation.
thorough, then the axiom of ontification itself obviously, a simplistic chronological relationship The suggestion now, then, is that if the
165