Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 02:12:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Avant-Garde ???



>
>It seems to me that the problem is with the word "resistant".  Resistant
>to what?  Resistant to "recuperation" by capitalism?  Do we really care
>whether capitalism does or does not "recuperate" something?  It seems to me
>that what is at stake is something completely different than playing
>"try and recuperate that one" games with capitalism.  What _is_ at stake
>in this "resistance"?  If we conceive of "avant-garde" as being some kind of
>a machine of resistance, then we can neither build one nor recognize one
>unless we understand what it is that we want to resist, and what kind of
>machine would be capable of doing the job.
>
>
>-m


Here we have two different models of the Vanguard --  one as permanent
opposition (nihlist) and the other as the shock troops of the humanist
social revolution ( the avant garde).  Both in the long run serve the same
function -- that is both are labortories for the intergration of new forms
and ideas and the dismantling of older no longer effective ones.  The
difference is the permanent opposition fulfills its task in a reactive
manner and the later is premised on an idealised vision of human freedom
and creativity.  Personally I prefer the latter to the former only because
I tend to believe in re-evaluation rather than devaluation.
SAUL




     --- from list avant-garde-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---