You are on page 1of 26

Cultural Sociology

http://cus.sagepub.com/ Art after 9/11: Critical Moments in Lean Times


Julia Rothenberg Cultural Sociology 2012 6: 177 originally published online 3 August 2011 DOI: 10.1177/1749975511404851 The online version of this article can be found at: http://cus.sagepub.com/content/6/2/177

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Sociological Association

Additional services and information for Cultural Sociology can be found at: Email Alerts: http://cus.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://cus.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

>> Version of Record - May 9, 2012 OnlineFirst Version of Record - Aug 3, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

404851

CUSXXX10.1177/1749975511404851RothenbergCultural Sociology

Article

Art after 9/11: Critical Moments in Lean Times


Julia Rothenberg
Queensborough Community College, City University of New York, USA

Cultural Sociology 6(2) 177200 The Author(s) 2012 Reprints and permission: sagepub. co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1749975511404851 cus.sagepub.com

Abstract
This article presents fieldwork that I conducted on the response of several New York artists to the events of 9/11 and the representation of these events in the mainstream media. Through interviews, analysis of works of art, and the development of a theoretical framework derived from both Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin, I argue that the work of these artists constituted a critical response to historical events. I explain how Adornos argument concerning the critical dimension of aesthetic experience is useful for understanding this response. In addition, I invoke Adornos dialectical understanding of arts dual-character in order to explain how critical art is possible within an art world dominated by market concerns. I also explore Walter Benjamins contentions concerning the democratizing capacities of new media and the withering of the aura as an important corrective to Adornos narrow focus on modernist formal development.

Keywords
Theodor Adorno, artists, Walter Benjamin, media, political art, public sphere, September 11 terrorist attacks, sociology of art

Since the onset of modernity, cities such as New York have been incubators of avantgarde developments in the arts. With the triumph of neoliberal policy, over the past several decades federal funding for the arts, along with affordable work, living, and alternative exhibition spaces, has rapidly dwindled. At the same time, the art market has become increasingly inflated (at least until recently)1 as works of art take unprecedented value as sources of financial investment and social prestige. While this situation militates, in general, against the production and exhibition of socially critical works of art, some artists manage both to negotiate the pressures of the market and to produce works of art that are critical of existing social conditions. Such works provide alternatives to the ways that mainstream media sources frame social and political events, and are especially important in light of the increased domination of the public sphere by corporate interests
Corresponding author: Julia Rothenberg, 341 West 24th Street, Apartment 3D, New York, NY, 10011, USA. Email: juliarothenberg@aol.com

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

178

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

(Habermas, 1992; Klein, 2002; Low and Smith, 2006). In what follows I will discuss several New York City-based artists whose work took on themes suggested by the personal trauma and political context of 9/11in a manner which diverges from what James Scott (1990) called public transcripts of the event presented by the mainstream media. I account for the existence of these reflective and critical works of art within the context of current market conditions through Theodor Adornos assessment of arts dual-character and, to a lesser degree, Walter Benjamins understanding of the democratic possibilities of new media. By way of categories developed by Adorno, I will examine the manner in which the experience of aesthetic reflection that these works of art evoke stands in (critical) contrast to commercial media sources that actively promoted an unreflective interpretation of 9/11, which supported the political agenda of the Bush administration. In response to some important limitations presented by Adorno in the context of postmodern art, I will also resurrect Benjamins contentions concerning the critical capacities of mechanical reproduction and the withering of the aura. Benjamins optimistic reading of new media, while not without problems, helps to explain the critical dimension of some of the work I will discuss. My central goal in this study is to establish a theoretical and empirical basis on which to claim that the sphere of artistic production, though dominated by commercial interests, still maintains the capacity to contribute to a public sphere of expression and experience. The case of New York artists response to 9/11 provides a unique opportunity through which to develop such a basis because of the public visibility of both the New York art world and the traumatic attack on human life and US authority. Less central, but also important, to this study is my desire to make a case for the continued relevance of the work of both Adorno and Benjamin to the sociology of art and culture. Adornos dialectical understanding of arts dual-character is especially significant in that it provides a way to think the possibility of autonomy within heteronomy. In addition, his historical and social account of artistic form and aesthetic experience helps to get around the narrow notion that art must be explicitly political in order to express social resistance or critique.

Methods Deployed
After September 11, I was commissioned to study the impact of this event on artists communities in New York City.2 I was well positioned to find informants for this project because of my prior career as a practicing artist and actor in the art world. I located my sample of informants through art-world contacts that I had maintained, others that I renewed, and some to whom I was newly introduced. Based on my snowball sample, I interviewed and visited the studios of at least ten New York City artists whose lives and work had been directly impacted by 9/11 and its economic, social, and political aftermath. I also interviewed directors and staff from an array of New York City galleries, ranging from blue-chip commercial venues (galleries that exhibit the top-selling artists) to experimental galleries showing riskier artists whose work had not yet achieved or because of its non-commercial nature was unlikely to achieve much market success. These interviews took place over a six-month period in 20023, during which time I repeatedly visited artists studios and galleries, sometimes dropping by for a chat,

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

179

sometimes for scheduled interviews, and sometimes for gallery openings or other public events. Although the art-world actors whom I interviewed for this project were aware of my current status as a sociologist, my job was made much easier because of my past status as an insider.3 I am somewhat fluent in the vocabulary and discourses that matter in the art world, and was able to provide commentary on works of art and various artists as they came up in conversation, and to easily discuss artistic goals, influences, and media with artists. Indeed, the analysis that I offer here was developed in part through a collaborative process in which the artists and I together worked to arrive at an interpretation of their work. Thus, my attempt to bring to light the social meaning and significance of the works of art that I discuss also reflects the intent of the artists. While I interviewed almost a dozen artists for this study, I chose artists who were and still are active players in the New York art scene and art market, but at the same time are not among the top tier of commercially successful artists (this is no longer the case for Paul Chan, who has since achieved star status). The artists in my sample all rely, or would like to rely, on the market and/or commissions and grants to earn their daily bread. In this sense they are professional artists. On the other hand, none of them had achieved the celebrity or name recognition of top-ticket younger contemporary artists (at least during the time period in which I was conducting my interviews undoubtedly the names have now changed) such as Mathew Barney, John Currin, Cicely Brown, and Vanessa Beecroft. Thus, while their work maintains some level of visibility, at least in terms of the New York City art audience, they are not bound by the constraints of a market and collectors who expect them to produce a signature product. Unlike top-selling art stars, they were relatively free to explore new themes and materials in their work in direct response to historical events.4 Indeed, I do not claim to have collected a random or exhaustive sample of contemporary art or contemporary artists response to 9/11. On the basis of my educated observation of the current art world, however, I will claim that the work that I discuss does not represent an anomaly in terms of style, technique, or content. What links these artists is that they all, in different ways, presented complex, nuanced, and critical viewpoints of the events leading up to, during, and after 9/11, especially in comparison with the mainstream medias treatment of the disaster and ensuing events. By incorporating interviews with artists and taking, more or less at face value, the claims of subjects regarding the intention and meaning of their work in an analysis that borrows much from Adorno, I risk running afoul of his ghost. Despite Adornos forays into survey research under the auspices of both the Princeton Radio Project and studies of anti-Semitism (see Jenemann, 2007, for a discussion of both), he was a vehement and consistent critic of what he saw as a fetishization of positivism and empiricism in the social sciences (Adorno et al., 1976). While I agree with many aspects of Adornos critique of mainstream social science, I do not follow his dismissal of the accounts that subjects provide concerning their lives and the meaning that they attribute to cultural objects as mere effects of dominant ideology. Unlike Adorno, I do not believe that it is only critical theorists who are capable of providing insight into social conditions. Indeed, the contradiction between Adornos claim that the subject has been rendered all but incapable of resistance and the very existence of his own work has been pointed out by a number of critics5 and remains unresolved.

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

180

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

Central to my study are the works of art themselves. Although the meaning attributed to these works by artists and other viewers plays an important role in my interpretation of the work, I also engage a critical analysis of the works of art which issues in part from a reconstruction of ideas from both Adorno and Benjamin that I will present below. Through the lens of this reconstruction, the works of art will be treated as data in their own right capable of rendering meaning that may dovetail with, but is not completely dependent on, the accounts offered by artists and other art-world actors.

Theoretical Orientations
The sociology of art (Becker, 2008; Bourdieu, 1987; Zolberg, 1990) has contributed much to our understanding of the social processes by which works of art are produced and consecrated; the networks, hierarchies, and power relations that characterize art worlds; the manner in which the aesthetic sphere serves to legitimize class domination; and the importance of art worlds in the development of post-industrial urban economies. However, at least in the United States, the sociology of art has done little to develop a framework which can account for the production of socially critical artwork within a cultural landscape dominated by the logic of globalized capitalism, and through which such works of art can be interpreted.6 I argue that the basis for such a framework can be found by readdressing the work of Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin, both of whom analyzed the complicated relationship between works of art and social processes, and sought to explain arts status as both commodity and site of social critique. In what follows I will re-examine several of Adornos and Benjamins key concepts in an attempt to understand the terms on which the production of socially critical artwork after 9/11 was possible within a market-dominated art world, and against the background of a public permeated by commercial media which continually reinforced a politics and social strategy of fear. My aim, however, is not to call for a return to the critical theory of the Frankfurt School as an end point for social analysis. The conditions for the production and consumption of works of art (and what critical theory termed the culture industry) have been dramatically altered since Adornos death in 1969, as has the relationship between these two spheres of cultural production and the nature of the objects produced. Nonetheless, through a reappraisal of some of Adornos and Benjamins key categories in particular those which address the possibilities for autonomy within heteronomy we might begin to forge concepts, categories, and frameworks to understand the complicated position of art in our own time.

Why the Return?


Modernism generated a plethora of discussion concerning arts role in society and its potential to express social criticism or even to act as a catalyst for social change. Between the 1930s and the 1970s a number of scholars associated with the Frankfurt School produced important works exploring the social position of art from the perspective of critical theory. Habermas (1992), for example, chronicled the significance of works of art, music, and literature in the development of the public sphere and bourgeois subjectivity. Both Herbert Marcuse (1972) and Ernst Bloch (1989) discussed the relationship between aesthetic experience, freedom, and utopia in late capitalist society, and Walter Benjamin

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

181

(1986) sought to understand the complex interplay between aesthetics, fascism, and democracy. Adorno, the most prolific of the Frankfurt School theorists on the subjects of art and culture, considered works of art to be some of the most significant documents of modernity, because in these objects, semi-protected from the market and the logic of instrumental reason, the contradictions and complex dynamics of late capitalist society were revealed. A particularly important conversation on the relationship between art and social critique between Walter Benjamin and Theodor Adorno began in the 1930s and continued for almost a decade. Benjamins, and to a lesser degree Adornos, thoughts on arts relationship to critical theory and praxis, and the possibility for the tools of new media to contribute to arts potential as a critical sphere of social activity, had real resonance for artists and critics all the way to the 1980s. Today, however, despite the relatively recent acceptance of the sociology of art as a legitimate area within mainstream sociology, there is a dearth of literature from within the social sciences addressing arts critical or utopian dimensions. There are several explanations for this lacuna. First of all, any discussion of arts possible critical or emancipatory capacities inevitably speaks the language of immanent critique or, what Paul Jones (2007), writing in Cultural Sociology, referred to as sociological-emancipatory hermeneutics. Contemporary social theory, both in terms of conventional sociology and, as Jones (2007) points out, in terms of the more critical work of post-structuralists such as Foucault and Bourdieu, is deeply suspicious of the sort of normatively immanent analysis typical of the Frankfurt School. And, while the discourse of immanence characteristic of the Hegelian Marxist tradition has become unfashionable, Durkheimian functionalism has attained a strong presence in the sociology of culture through the mainstream reception and use of the work of Pierre Bourdieu. Indeed, Bourdieus unparalleled influence on social studies of art worlds has led many researchers to the foregone conclusion that arts social role can be adequately explained through an account of what Herbert Marcuse (1968) once called its affirmative function.7 Social and cultural theorys current lack of interest in the capacity of art to provide a site for social criticism and utopian longings may also be due to the nature of the object itself. While modern art was always linked to bourgeois economic and social interests by what Clement Greenberg (1965: 8) called an umbilical cord of gold, the ideal or stance of independence and creative freedom was fundamental to artists self-perception and to the audiences understanding and experience of modern art. Today, the role of art in the accumulation of capital and the promotion of economic interests seems to eclipse the critical, creative, or utopian functions once attributed to art and artists in part because of their marginality within the market economy. Currently, the tourism industry relies on public and privately funded museums to provide blockbuster exhibitions, value is accrued to real estate because of a neighborhoods real or mythic association with artistic production and its bohemian accoutrements, and gallery districts such as New Yorks Chelsea are the sites of multimillion-dollar global financial transactions (Caves, 2002; Deutsche and Ryan, 1984; Florida, 2003; Hackworth, 2002; Smith and DeFilippis, 1999; Zukin, 1982). While most art producers economic position is tenuous, the symbolic value occupied by what Bourdieu (1993: 75) referred to as the disavowal of the economy is lost in the contemporary environment. As the art critic Jerry Saltz (2008: 1) recently observed:

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

182

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

The market is now so pervasive that it is simply a condition as much a part of the art world as galleries and museums. Even if youre not making money as is the case with most of us thats your relationship to the market. To say you wont participate in the market is like saying you refuse to breathe the air because its polluted.

Indeed, arts relationship to commercial interests, along with the shrinking of public funding for art works (and the growing importance of corporate funding) and work space, suggests that conditions for the production and distribution of work that is critical of social conditions (particularly the social condition of market primacy) are hindered. In such an environment Bourdieus insights concerning the role of art in providing the ideological legitimation for class stratification seem at first glance sufficient to explain the cultural logic of contemporary artistic production. At the same time, as my research concerning the impact of 9/11 on New Yorks artists indicates, complicated and critical works of art continue to be generated from within the officially sanctioned art world. I do not wish to deny the changes in the cultural, political, and economic environment that postmodernism has wrought. However, a more comprehensive understanding of arts social position today is gained through a rethinking of some of the questions raised by both Adorno and Benjamin almost 80 years ago. Their work is particularly useful for thinking about the relevance of art as symbolic representation and expression which is semi-autonomous from culture that is generated by corporate concerns and produced directly for the market (with television as the most significant instance). Adorno and Benjamin had a number of disagreements about arts loss of aura, mechanical reproduction, and the possibility of social resistance activated by collective cultural experience. However, they did share a belief in arts potential to act as a tool in the aid of critical consciousness, the ultimate goal of which would be radical social change. In what follows I will be able to touch on only a few of the points raised by Adorno and Benjamin, and will address these points with only the broadest of strokes. My intent here is not to provide a systematic elaboration of the work of these two thinkers. Instead, my goal is to remind social science of the precedent for analyzing works of art as meaningful, complex, and critical social signifiers, and to suggest some strategies for building on this precedent.

The Commercial Media Responds to 9/11


The artists whose work I encountered during my post-9/11 research are not marginal (at least not intentionally) to the art worlds symbolic or money economy. Each of them, in different ways, has had to come to terms with the impact of the market on their production and identity as artists. However, during a period in which mainstream sources of public communication and representation provided an account of events that served to legitimize the administrations push to military intervention and the revoking of basic civil liberties, these artists created work that represented the emotional and political complexities of the event and thus contributed to a critical public sphere of experience. Before moving on to a more extended discussion and analysis of specific works of art, I would like to take a brief look at how the mainstream media framed the events of 9/11,

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

183

and particularly the war on terror which ensued, in order to highlight more clearly the alternatives presented from within the art world. On the local level, the media recorded the event in ways that connected the tragedy with the loss of individual lives. Directly following the disaster, the local television, radio, and newspapers provided information to citizens about volunteer opportunities, and lauded the bravery of the New York City police and in particular the rescue missions of the fire-fighters. In the following days, weeks, and months the media highlighted the pain and suffering experienced by those who had lost loved ones in the disaster. Nevertheless, the commercial nature of mainstream media dictated that the events be narrated according to the conventions of the human interest story, and the visuals and accompanying commentary soon became clichd and repetitive, while images of grieving and tearful family members exploited suffering in the interest of spectacle.8 The New York Times, CNN, and the major network news programs helped to market and justify the ensuing wars in Afghanistan and then Iraq. As media scholar Daya Thussu (2006: 3) notes, in addition to reporting facts, the task of the media, and television in particular, is also codifying and circulating myths. Thus, the media complied with the Bush administrations attempts to present the war in mythical terms and in a highly moralistic language (Thussu, 2006: 3). Thussu goes on to point out that, in the post-Cold War era, the mythic representation of communism as radical evil and as the pre-eminent threat to national interests has been replaced by an equally powerful narrative about radical Islam exemplified by shadowy networks such as al-Qaeda, with its alleged links to rogue states such as Iran (Thussu, 2006: 6). In this narrative Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, Hamas, and Abu Musab alZarqawi are all linked together, and the United States once again (as during the Cold War) is the hero on the white horse, delivering the bounty of democracy and human rights to the rest of the world. In this mythic presentation of reality, no mention is made of the role of the US in bringing both the Taliban and Saddam Hussein to power, and little is said about the suffering of Palestinians who have lost their homes and lives during Israels expansion or the loss of countless Afghan and Iraqi civilian lives in the wars that followed 9/11. The news media in our society has been analyzed by more than one generation of social theorists, and much of the critical work on media and television confirms the role of dominant corporate and political interests in shaping the nature and ideological messages disseminated by television (Bagdikian 1987; Chomsky, 1989; Herman and Chomsky, 1988; Kellner, 1990). Artists, at least those who hope to gain commercial success, are bound by some of the same constraints as the commercial media in that they have to function within a competitive market marked by the interests of a dominant class. In addition, they may compete for public funding in a politically constrained environment. However, as I hope the examples employed will demonstrate, artists work (in part because of the persistence of western notions of artistic license, the autonomy of art, and the artist as socially marginal genius) is not wholly constrained by these forces. Thus, works of art can be embedded in the market and sanctified by conventional cultural gatekeepers such as museums, critics, and commercial galleries, while at the same time acting as repositories of critical thought and complex collective emotions.

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

184

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

Artists Respond to 9/11


September 11 was a profoundly visual event. Thousands of New Yorkers watched the Twin Towers, symbols of New Yorks dominance on the world financial stage, erupt in billowing smoke and fire. Millions more watched the event repeated endlessly on television, along with non-stop footage of rubble and city streets covered with white dust, and, most eerie of all, bodies tumbling down the sides of the towers. In addition to watching in fascination, New Yorkers assembled mementos and bits of visual detritus in the form of shrines, memorials, amateur photographs, and videos. Meanwhile, we were urged by social workers to avail ourselves of arts healing power and to attend performances and cultural events in order to aid the citys economy and send a message of defiance to the terrorists. Much of this popular visual outpouring echoed the medias tendency to sentimentalize the event, and much of the imagery we saw around us in windows, in public spaces, and again on television made copious use of symbols of nationalism, patriotism, and Christianity. Not surprisingly, many artists in New York also responded visually to the event, and these responses often represented the events, the subsequent political situation, and the medias interpretation of both in surprising and provocative ways. Much, but not all, of the work that I viewed made use of photography, video, and other forms of documentary media even, interestingly, when the artists usual medium was painting or sculpture. One artist with whom I spoke, Lee Songee, is an architect and film, video, and computer artist, originally from Taiwan. She described her sense of urgency to represent both her subjective reaction as an artist and a New Yorker, and her desire to communicate with an international audience. Her video WTC RIP (see Figures 14), which was shown at the 2002 Venice Biennale, attempts to do just that.9 Construction of the World Trade Center had begun the year that Songee (Rothenberg and Kornblum, 2005: 256) first came to New York from Taiwan to study architecture, and despite the critical reception that its design had among her colleagues and professors, for her the towers were evocative and meaningful because they represented her birth in America. Then, she took to obsessively filming their construction with her video camera, thus endowing these icons to the excesses of modernist rationalism with an intensely personal and impressionistic identity. After the attacks, she returned to the site with her

Figure 1. Film still from Lee Songee, WTC RIP, 2002. Image provided by artist

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

185

Figure 2. Film still from Lee Songee, WTC RIP, 2002. Image provided by artist

Figure 3. Film still from Lee Songee, WTC RIP, 2002. Image provided by artist

Figure 4. Film still from Lee Songee, WTC RIP, 2002. Image provided by artist

video camera to explore the ruins, and roamed the city recording the response of New Yorkers. Not long after 9/11 a friend of Songees who had been traveling in Europe told her about the anti-American sentiments he had encountered while abroad. Predictably,

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

186

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

many of the intellectuals and artists with whom he had spoken suggested that somehow Americans deserved this because of their arrogance in the global political arena and in particular their support of Israel. This conversation acted as a catalyst for Songee to create a piece from the footage she had recently collected and enter it in the competition for inclusion in the Venice Biennale. The aim of the video, according to Songee, was to humanize Americans and to rupture the common conflation of citizens of the United States with the policies of the Bush administration. On a more universal note, Songee (Rothenberg and Kornblum, 2005: 256) wanted to express her conviction that no human beings can deserve this sort of catastrophe. The video, which includes images of devastation along with the various responses of New Yorkers, including anti-war rallies in Union Square, candle-lighting vigils, and the assembling of shrines and memorials, explores questions of community, nationalism, and loss. Songee explicitly set out not to make a political tract but rather a tribute or portrait not sensationalistic. Just showing, not shaping it is a personal tribute. It humanizes. Its a personal piece to represent New Yorkers. I try to capture the moment and how New Yorkers felt, as a New Yorker (Rothenberg and Kornblum, 2005: 256). While the images in the video record New York City directly following the attacks, Songees motivations for making the video are also related in complex ways to her own experience of racism against Japanese people as a young child growing up in Taiwan, and her own encounters with racism as a Chinese woman in the United States. Songees thoughts concerning nationalism, racism, and hatred in a global world do not result in any clearly articulated theories or conclusions. Neither are her intentions explicitly political, nor is she representing herself as some sort of cultural ambassador or apologist for the United States. But she does succeed in both humanizing and universalizing these historical events in ways that are uniquely available to art. Tina La Porta, another artist with whom I was in contact after 9/11, also used new media, including film, video, photography, and the Internet, to create work that responded to questions raised by 9/11 and, in particular, the mainstream medias representation of the Arab world. La Porta was influenced by the emergence of media criticism and postmodern feminism in the 1980s, and, like artists such as Barbara Kruger and Jenny Holzer, she had dealt with themes concerning gender, the body, advertising, and the ideological role of language in some of her earlier work. While Songees work addressed the images of Americans and New Yorkers that were created and consumed by the rest of the world, La Portas work focused on the way that the western world mystifies and demonizes Arabs through visual representation and through the gender coding of these representations. After recovering from the shock of the attack, La Porta began obsessively watching television news. She was viewing channel 25 with news broadcasts from all over the world and started to take Polaroids from the television. Then she decided not to use US television because it goes too fast. European television, she noticed, holds images longer. She also noticed that the object of most of her photographs was masked or veiled Middle Eastern women and men. At this point La Porta had no conscious plan as to how she would eventually use these images. Then she was invited to do a residency in Istanbul during which she created an installation based on these images (Rothenberg and Kornblum, 2005: 257). The project La Porta finally completed in Turkey is called Total Screen (see Figures 5 and 6) and is based on the Polaroid photos she took from TV news images after 9/11. The

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

187

Figure 5. From installation by Tina La Porta, Total Screen, 2003, at Whitebox Annex, New York. Image provided by artist

Figure 6. From installation by Tina La Porta, Total Screen, 2003, at Whitebox Annex, New York. Image provided by artist

piece consists of a series of six of the Polaroid photographs of men and women in various kinds of veiling. These images have been blown up to larger than life-size and installed in a sunlit gallery with large windows overlooking the street, and are thereby made visible to passersby. In her press release La Porta explains how she became interested in the way the news media constructed our experience of events in Afghanistan and the Middle East region from a distance, and how she decided to pay special attention to representations of gender via the veil, hijab, burka, or chador. An additional reading of her work might consider her use of the media as an analogy to the veil. The media acts as a veil, masking critical dimensions of the social and political world: La Porta attempts to unveil, or expose, these dimensions, while also exposing the mediating or obfuscating role of the media even as it claims to provide a comprehensive account of the world. Other artists responded less directly to the media or the political situation. Susanna Heller is a Canadian painter based in Greenpoint who works in a semi-abstract painterly style, and whose drawings and paintings draw on her experience of the motion and ephemerality of

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

188

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

Figure 7. Susanna Heller, drawing, 2002. Image provided by artist

urban space. She was an early recipient of one of the CityScape residencies organized by the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, and much of her work reflected the view as seen from her studio on an upper floor of Tower Two of the World Trade Center. In several of her pieces from that period she plays with the strange, distorted perspective of Tower One afforded to her through her studio window. In the days and weeks following September 11, Heller went back to the site and created a series of drawings of rubble and building structures in various stages of collapse. These drawings were pinned to her studio wall and would form the starting point for a new series of paintings, as well as a companion piece to Tower One a portrait of the wreckage of what had been Tower Two (see Figures 710). Although Heller is a person of firm and outspoken political beliefs, her work does not adopt a didactic or even a discursive attitude. It rather affirms the practice of reflection and contemplation that art has traditionally demanded. Her explanation, however, implies that such contemplation can itself become a political act. Im not addressing it [the attacks and political situation] in a political way. Its about the power of stepping back and looking. If you take time to step back and look you might see that something is going wrong. Then she adds, women are watchers. Were made for making art. We have always had to watch to see what power is doing (cited in Rothenberg and Kornblum, 2005: 259). Paul Chan is another artist whose work on 9/11 is open-ended and evocative. Although I did not interview Chan for my 9/11 research, since I became aware of his work after the 9/11 project was complete, he deserves mention in the present context. One piece that he produced in the wake of the tragedy echoes Hellers convictions that stepping back and looking, especially during a time when the administration has called for unreflective action leading to disastrous results, is itself a political act. Alongside his career as an artist, Chan has also been committed to political activism. His engagement includes work with Voices in the Wilderness, a group of non-violent activists working to end the military and economic warfare in Iraq. (Chan spent an unsanctioned month in Iraq with Voices in the

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

189

Figure 8. Susanna Heller, drawing, 2002. Image provided by artist

Wilderness.) He also participated in the creation of the Peoples Guide to the Republican National Convention (an agitprop map of New York City for use by protestors in 2004). Nonetheless, he insists that his artwork is not explicitly political. On the other hand, like Heller he points to the relationship between aesthetic engagement and political critique: Doesnt honest learning require a leap that disengages what we know and engages us in what we dont? And doesnt this leap call for a kind of escape from ourselves? Isnt escape actually a kind of radical engagement? (cited in McClister, 2005). In 2005 Chan created a video installation called 1st Light, which was eventually shown at the Whitney Biennale (see Figure 11). In this video projection loop, dark silhouettes of debris and human figures fall through space while birds appear and reappear on a light pole. While the constant replay of these falling figures evokes the media loop on our televisions of towers burning and figures falling, the blurred and unstable quality of the imagery suggests that we are not seeing the full picture. At the same time the pace, luminosity, and visual delicacy of the piece invite a kind of engagement which must be called, for lack of a better term, aesthetic. I now turn to the work of Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin in order to illuminate how arts dual-character, or the possibility of autonomous cultural expression within heteronomous cultural and market conditions, can be understood.

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

190

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

Figure 9. Susanna Heller, drawing, 2002. Image provided by artist

A Temporary Return to Origins: Adorno and Benjamin


A fundamental tension exists between Adorno and Benjamin concerning what we call today new media, on the one hand, and high modernism, on the other. Adornos perspective on the former, as we will see, is particularly difficult to reconcile with the work of several of the artists I have discussed above and is, indeed, antiquated, at least in an unreconstructed form. His attempts to grasp the underlying critical impetus of artworks that fall within modernist parameters of aesthetic quality, however, still provide a fruitful starting point for understanding at least some contemporary art, including the work of at least two of the artists mentioned above. Adornos adherence to a critical appropriation of Hegelian dialectics allowed him to understand art in terms of its fundamentally contradictory social position. This position in which works of art can at the same time be both repositories of exchange value and critical of a system that reduces all value to that of exchange he termed arts dualcharacter (Adorno, 1997: 225).10 Arts dual-character, which it acquired along with the development of capitalism, reflects, for Adorno, the contradictory nature of capitalism itself: because market-based society severs the fetters of religious and paternal traditions,

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

191

Figure 10. Susanna Heller, Ruin, oil on canvas, 2003. Image provided by artist

it offers the promise of individual autonomy and rational social development. At the same time, according to Adorno (following Marx), exploitation and domination are the hidden mechanisms that fuel the law of exchange under capitalism, and the fetishized commodity form exerts a new irrational and homogenizing force on the social subject. Thus art, like the social subject of capitalism, expresses the promise of autonomy and is at the same time constrained and produced by fundamentally exploitative and irrational market relations. Works of art, then, confront society autonomously but are themselves social and thus caught up in heteronomous reality (Adorno, 1994: xi). The dual-character that Adorno (1975: 13) ascribes to works of art is typically, for him, contrasted with products of the cultural industry, which are no longer also commodities, but are commodities through and through. Adornos dual-character explains, for example, how it is that works of art as diverse as Pissarros landscapes and Duchamps readymades can oppose their own transformation into exchange value, while also offering themselves up as commodities on the

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

192

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

Figure 11. Paul Chan, 1st Light, 2005, digital video projection, 14 min. Courtesy of the artist and Greene Naftali Gallery, New York. Photo credit: Jean Vong

marketplace. This, according to Adorno (1984: 236), is not symptomatic of their failure, but rather the simple consequence of their participation in the relations of production. Because of its references to Hegelian/Marxist categories, Adornos account of arts dual-character proves somewhat resistant to appropriation by mainstream sociology. Nonetheless, it seems to me that arts dual-character must be problematized in order to understand and account for the complexity of arts relationship to dominant social patterns and structures. In order to understand the position of the works of art that I have discussed above, some kind of robust explanation of arts ability simultaneously to embrace the market, and provide legitimation in the form of cultural capital to actors whose social status and power derives from the market, and to oppose the political, social, and economic conditions that sustain the status quo. It will not do to reduce works such as those produced by Heller, Chan, La Porta, and Songee to the simple binary of political art vs. affirmative culture (to borrow the term from Herbert Marcuse, 1968). I do not wish to repackage Adorno in order to make him palatable to contemporary currents in sociology. However, I do believe that a productive notion of dual-character could be developed by thinking about Adornos category in terms of, for instance, more recent attempts to understand the ambivalent, equivocal nature of popular culture.

Two Halves of a Torn Whole


Adornos analysis of modern art is always dialectically connected to his critique of mass culture, or the culture industry. He saw in both of these moments of bourgeois cultural production capitalisms inability to make good on its claim to provide the conditions for freedom on the levels of the individual and the social. While both reflect societys failures, Adorno particularly indicted the culture industry for its role in turning potential subjects into the passive consumers (masses) necessary for the reproduction of capitalist society. The culture industry, for Adorno (1975: 12), transfers the profit motive naked onto cultural forms. Through standardization, mass production, and the reduction of individuals to consumer-preference groups, the culture industry drains both cultural

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

193

objects and consumers of these objects of individuality and uniqueness. Even more insidious, for Adorno (1975: 19), than the culture industrys cultivation of consumerism is its obstruction of the development of autonomous, independent individuals who judge and decide consciously for themselves. In other words, the culture industry actively prohibits the production of the kinds of citizens that are necessary to maintain a democratic society. For Adorno, art alone was capable of resisting late capitalisms drive to annihilate subjectivity and critical consciousness. Deeply entrenched in the aesthetic program of modernism, Adorno understood arts critical potential to lie in its refusal to use conventionally accessible symbolic means to communicate. For Adorno (Horkheimer and Adorno, 1972: 131), readily intelligible language be it verbal, musical, or visual language had already been appropriated by the culture industry, where, stripped of any critical authority, it was instrumentalized in order to create a false sense of a unified culture. Indeed, he claimed that for works of art to avoid surrender[ing] to pure propaganda they must rid themselves of any communicative means that would perhaps make themselves accessible to the public (Adorno, 1997: 243). In so doing, he asserted [a]rtworks exercise a practical effect not by haranguing but by the scarcely apprehensible transformation of consciousness (Adorno, 1984: 243). Art, especially modern, formalist art, was able to act as a refuge for critical and even utopian thought precisely because its social content was veiled by its difficulty, negativity, and self-referentiality. Inside the special languages of aesthetic form, the suffering of the individual in an unfree society could find expression, and indeed a model of a different kind of society and individuality could be worked out. As Adorno explains in his last work, Aesthetic Theory, first published in 1966, three years before his death: As a musical composition compresses time, and as a painting folds spaces into one another, so the possibility is concretized that the world could be other than it is (Adorno, 1997: 138). Adorno here is valorizing the modernist tendency toward abstraction and the exploration of the formal languages or particular mediums as opposed to the direct representation and narrative content that characterizes so much contemporary art. However, his reflections are important in that they suggest ways of interpreting seemingly abstract or hermetic works of art as important social statements. The development of analytical cubism, for example, in the first decades of the 20th century may seem to be a purely formal exercise, but in fact can be interpreted as a critique of subject-centered reason and Enlightenment rationalism and, by extension, the devastation wrought by industrialization and the impending global war. This critique, however, is not leveled in the language of representation, but rather by evoking alternatives to linear perspective and a rejection of realism. In a similar fashion the artist Susanna Heller was intensely aware of the dangerous implication of the medias account of the situation after 9/11, but chose to challenge and represent the events through a highly personalized and formal painterly iconography. Likewise, the art of Paul Chan, whose political convictions have taken the form of social activism, is often contemplative, lyrical, and ambiguous, inviting the viewer to engage in an aesthetic, visually layered, and seemingly apolitical experience. In contrast to commercial media, in the work of Chan and Heller the viewer is invited to slow down the pace of reception and to make use of their imagination to imbue the layers of imagery with meaning. An internal relationship between the particular moments that constitute

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

194

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

the work of art is implicit in the fact that the works constitute singular pieces, but the viewer is allowed to relish each color, shape, and movement as both individual moment and as part of a larger whole. The work of Chan and Heller invites reflection not action, and thus models a different response from the call for war and immediate crackdown on civil liberties issued repeatedly by the government. And both Chan and Heller, in their refusal of transparent communication and in their use of evocative but ambivalent imagery, seem to reaffirm Adornos conviction that everyday communication had been reduced to jargon and clich (think of shock and awe, axis of evil, and so forth) through its deployment by the government via the mouthpiece of the media. Instead, these artists intend to foster an aesthetic experience which reminds the viewer that the reality cultivated in both everyday life and through the mass media is embedded in a particular ideology, and that, as Adorno (1997: 243) reminded us, the world could be other than it is.

Walter Benjamin and the New Media


Adorno, with his notion of dual-character and with his understanding of the social and political implications of aesthetic languages, has provided a perspective from which to understand those works of art that fall within modernist aesthetic norms. However, in light of much of the work produced today, including many of the examples I have discussed, Adorno seems hopelessly stuck in another era. Born in 1882, Walter Benjamin was a decade older than Adorno; however, Benjamins thoughts on the importance of techniques of mass reproduction and his embrace of the breakdown of arts sanctified status were much more in line with the thinking of avant-gardists in both his day and our own. The two men voiced their disagreements over the role of the aura, mass reproduction, democratic access, and the implications of collective reception in a series of letters and essays written from the mid to late 1930s (Jameson, 1995). Adornos judgment regarding products of mass culture and the techniques used to create these products was uncompromisingly negative. At the same time, while acknowledging that modern art bears both the marks of and some of the responsibility for the damaged society from which it comes, he by and large embraced its canonical works. Benjamin, like Adorno, understood that the culture industry performed a central social function of repression and indoctrination. However, he also argued that the technical means and modes of reception cultivated by the culture industry contained latent democratic or even revolutionary possibilities. Benjamin tied these themes together in his 1936 essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (Benjamin, 1986). Ultimately, in an eccentric appropriation of Marx, he believed that new techniques of cultural production could be harnessed in the interest of social transformation. Mechanical reproduction (including prints, photography, film, techniques of sound recording today we would also have to consider computergenerated images, text, and sound and video) destroys the aura that surrounds classical and modern art. Mechanically reproduced works are neither unique nor irreplaceable. They do not (or did not in Benjamins time) hang in museums, churches, or official buildings. Rather, they are produced in bulk, can be bought and owned by the average citizen, and can be held close, inspected, and manipulated at the viewers will. Consequently, they

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

195

no longer function as symbols of authority but instead are potential instruments of liberation insofar as they challenge traditional culture (Benjamin, 1986: 221). Benjamin was also interested in the distracted mode of aesthetic experience characteristic of mass society. Now, rather than being absorbed by the work of art, the distracted mass absorbs the work of art (Benjamin, 1986: 240; emphasis in original). Benjamin points to architecture as a prototype for this mode of distracted reception. Buildings, he points out, are appropriated by use and by perception not so much by attention as by habit (Benjamin, 1986: 240). It is this mode of appropriation, not aesthetic contemplation, which, for Benjamin, is most likely to lead to progressive social transformation. Art that is perceived in a state of distraction, like architecture, is integrated into everyday life and activity, and thus can act as a catalyst, in the habits of consciousness that it cultivates, for the transformation of everyday life. Painting (and other forms of art that demand a purely aesthetic form of perception) is restricted in its effect to the aesthetic sphere, which is one of contemplation. Adorno contested Benjamins assertion that techniques of mechanical reproduction, because they lend themselves to perception in a state of distraction, represent a revolutionary advance over traditional techniques. Adornos argument concerning arts emancipatory qualities hinges on its ability to reflect society in its totality, rather than as fragmented or isolated moments. For Adorno, it is only when we reflect on society in its totality that we can recognize the contradictions and unfulfilled promises of our present social forms. The effectiveness of the culture industry lies, in part, in its ability to fragment reality into seemingly unrelated bits and pieces storylines in which, as individual moments, contradictions can be satisfyingly resolved. In addition, products of the culture industry fit neatly into the work habits demanded of subjects by modern society. The modern worker (presumably both industrial and white-collar) returns home from a day of exhausting yet meaningless and repetitive activity, too tired to concentrate on demanding forms of entertainment. The worker is presented instead, through radio, television, and film, with entertainment that both mirrors work activity in its mindless repetition and is easily consumable in the state of distraction in which the worker is left by a days labor. Such distracted habits of perception, as encouraged by the same technologies lauded by Benjamin, actively prohibit the kind of critical consciousness required in order to apprehend the real nature of social existence (Adorno, 1994: 228). Benjamins work on mechanical reproduction has proved extremely prescient. Since Andy Warhol it has been common practice for artists to base their work on the deployment of images and signs derived from commercial media and techniques of mass reproduction. Many artists in the 1980s, such as Barbara Kruger, Jenny Holzer, and Cindy Sherman, experimented using images, techniques, and language derived directly from Hollywood and advertising to explicitly subvert the messages disseminated by these industries. Their work was socially critical, but also appealing to a mass audience because of its popular-culture references and its irreverence toward traditional forms of art and, by implication, traditional culture. These artists created work that affected audiences on a variety of levels (aesthetic, emotive, cognitive) and raised important issues concerning the culture of consumption and the objectification of sexuality. By the beginning of the new century the political focus that characterized 1980s art was long gone from the commercial art world, and in-your-face political messages such

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

196

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

as those disseminated by Barbara Kruger had fallen out of fashion with the mainstream art-worlds gatekeepers. However, like an earlier generation, after 9/11 La Porta and Songee reacted to, and acted upon, the material disseminated by the media, capitalizing on the immediacy and recognizability of commercial imagery. The ease of reproducibility and availability (Benjamins democratizing tendencies) provided through the Polaroid allowed La Porta to claim imagery that had been generated by the mainstream media to construct a particular narrative or reading of the events and geopolitical situation following 9/11. She was able to re-narrate, or de-narrate, these events through a deployment of mechanical means and aesthetic dispositions available to her as an artist who came of age in a thoroughly technologized society. La Porta fixed the speedy spectacle of fragmented images delivered to the television screen, and reassembled these images in a meaningful manner and in a context (the gallery space) which invites mindful aesthetic contemplation. In so doing, she was also able to subvert the medias tendency to produce or stimulate a state of distraction in its audience by providing the viewer with the opportunity to experience her own subjectivity through the experience of an aesthetic totality. In this way, her work harnesses the democratizing potential of publicly available, non-auratic imagery that Benjamin recognized. At the same time, her re-presentation of these images in a context of aesthetic contemplation resurrects through aesthetic experience the sense of totality that Adorno demanded of critical art. Through her use of film, Lee Songee is able to claim public images, including images of a privatized public landscape, as well as the fragility of technocratic modernism represented by the World Trade Center. Like Benjamins (1986: 230) cameraman, Songee used her equipment to deeply penetrate the reality of life in New York City before and directly following 9/11. At the same time, in contrast to the immediacy of the filmed image celebrated by Benjamin, like La Porta, Songee imposes a distance and coherence on her subject matter through her restriction to black-and-white film and editing guided by formal and aesthetic considerations. Thus, her work also represents a totality in Adornos sense of the word. Rather than mimicking the two-second sound-bite, fragmented approach dictated by the television industry, Songees work can be viewed as a whole, unfolding in time and offering the space for creative reflection. At the same time, her choice to work with film (which is generally viewed collectively) and her explicit aim to respond to public opinion suggests a refusal of modern arts hermetic and solitary tendency. In this sense she also reaffirms Benjamins conviction that, in an age of mechanical reproduction, works of art become more public and democratic.

Conclusion
Contemporary visual art, especially as it manifests in global centers such as New York City, has reached an unprecedented level of public visibility through the growth of cultural tourism, the proliferation of international art fairs and biennials, and the explosive growth of the art market. These factors both inhibit and enhance the possibility for art to provide a critical perspective on contemporary social and political events: on the one hand, people pay attention to contemporary visual art; on the other, artists are constrained by the increasing importance of the market (as opposed to public funding) to produce works of art that are commercially viable. As the preceding study of a handful of New York based artists

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

197

responses to 9/11 demonstrates, the art world, as opposed to commercial media, still constitutes a site of relative autonomy from which to launch social critique. In the examples that I have offered, this social critique issues not from an explicitly political agenda on the part of the artist, but through the activation of aesthetic experience. In order to conduct a critical reading of the work of La Porta, Songee, Heller, and Chan, I have reconstructed key categories from the work of Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin. Both Adorno and Benjamin longed for radical social change. In different ways, they both believed that art had a key role to play in the possibility of such change. Notwithstanding the failures of each to come to terms with the blind spots in his own arguments, and not withstanding societys failure to make good on the radical possibilities that each proposed, their understanding of arts complex and potentially critical social role can act as a starting point for reflection in an immeasurably different (but in some ways similar) historical moment. The work I have discussed, and its position within larger social forces such as the market, does not harken revolution. But it does suggest that works of art, as communicative and symbolic contexts, can provide an alternative framing for experience, history, and politics. At the same time, as I hope I have demonstrated, my aim is not a simple grafting of an Adornian or Benjaminian analysis onto current forms of art. The historical conditions including, but not limited to, the current market-driven nature of the art world, the increased capacity and sophistication of commercial media, the significance of postmodernisms critique of the high art/mass culture distinction, and other factors too numerous to list render such a grafting neither feasible nor desirable. New language, ways of seeing, and critical categories that are adequate to current conditions need to be developed (and indeed have been developed) in order to shed meaningful light on contemporary cultural objects. More significant, however, is my rejection of Adornos assumption (or prediction) regarding the degree to which the contemporary subjects critical capacities have been diminished by mass culture. As I hope my examples make clear, contemporary subjects continue to possess the capacity for critical meaning-making activity. At the same time, works of art operate as a locus of meaning which is dialogical, inexhaustible, and subject to a temporal flow. Meaning is produced in the relation between the work, the intention of the artist, the community of interpreters, and the historical moment. Notes
1. Earlier versions of this paper were written before the art-market crash of 2008. For an account see A. Peers, Crash Goes the Art World, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/ story/0,28124,24684093-5018055,00.html. 2. The results of this study can be found in Rothenberg and Kornblum (2005). Much of the discussion of works of art that responded to 9/11 in the present article is based on research that I conducted for the earlier study. 3. I have written elsewhere in more detail about the relationship between art and ethnography (Rothenberg and Fine, 2007). 4. My argument that more well-known artists are constrained in their ability to spontaneously reflect on immediate social concerns because collectors expect them to continue working with the themes and methods with which they have already been identified is supported by interviews conducted with dealers at the blue-chip galleries such as Gagosian and Mary Boone.

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

198

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

5. See, for example, Habermas (1985, 1987) and Honneth (1996). 6. This claim may seem unjustified to readers outside the United States, especially those in Great Britain, for whom the critical tradition of cultural studies looms large in current social studies of art and culture. However, as Janet Wolff (1999), writing on just this question, notes, American sociology of culture has distanced itself from (and is indeed hostile to) cultural studies and maintains that most sociologists of culture and the arts base their work on pre-critical, sometimes positivistic, premises [and that the] tenacious social-scientific commitment to objectivity, even in qualitative (rather than quantitative) work, blocks such scholarship from addressing certain questions of interpretation, representation and subjectivity. It is to this tendency, most egregiously (but not only) manifested in the United States, that I direct my criticisms of the sociology of art. 7. In a significant interview with the explicitly political and critical conceptual artist Hans Haacke, Bourdieu (Bourdieu and Haacke, 1995) implicitly revokes his earlier, more functionalist position as he discusses the possibilities for intellectuals and artists to develop an open realm free of symbolic domination. 8. For literature on the mainstream media response, see Grewal (2003), Li (2007), Torres (2008). 9. For more information about the works of art reproduced here, please contact the author. 10. Robert Hulott-Kentor translates Doppelt-Charakter in Adornos Aesthetic Theory (1997) as double-character. Although I am using this translation as reference, I prefer to use the term dual-character, a translation of Doppelt-Charakter that seems to me to better capture the dialectical dimension that Adorno intended.

References
Adorno T (1975) Culture Industry Reconsidered, New German Critique 6. Adorno T (1984) Minima Moralia: Reflections from Damaged Life. London: Verso. Adorno T (1994) On the Fetish Character of Music and the Regression of Listening, in Arato A and Gebhart E (eds) The Essential Frankfurt School Reader. New York: Continuum, 270300. Adorno T (1997) Aesthetic Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Adorno T, Dahrendorf R, Pilot H, Albert H, Habermas J and Popper K (1976) The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology. London: Heinemann. Bagdikian B (1987) The Media Monopoly. 2nd edn. Boston: Beacon. Becker H (2008) Art Worlds. Berkeley: University of California Press. Benjamin W (1986) The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Illuminations. New York: Schocken. Bloch E (1989) The Utopian Function of Art and Literature: Selected Essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bourdieu P (1987) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bourdieu P (1993) The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press. Bourdieu P and Haacke H (1995) Free Exchange. Cambridge: Polity. Caves R (2002) Creative Industries: Contact between Art and Commerce. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Chomsky N (1989) Necessary Illusions. Boston: South End. Deutsche R and Ryan C (1984) The Fine Art of Gentrification, 31 October. Florida R (2003) The Rise of the Creative Class and How Its Transformed Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York: Basic.

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

Rothenberg

199

Greenberg C (1965) Art and Culture. Boston, MA: Beacon. Grewal I (2003) Transnational America: Race, Gender and Citizenship after 9/11, Social Identities 9(4): 53561. Habermas J (1985) Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1. Boston: Beacon. Habermas J (1987) The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Habermas J (1992) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hackworth J (2002) Post-recession Gentrification in New York City, Urban Affairs Review, July. Herman E and Chomsky N (1988) Manufacturing Consent. New York: Pantheon. Honneth A (1996) The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts. Cambridge: Polity. Horkheimer M and Adorno A (1972) The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception, in Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York: Herder and Herder. Jameson F (ed.) (1995) Aesthetics and Politics. London: Verso. Jenemann D (2007) Adorno in America. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Jones P (2007) Beyond the Semantic Big Bang: Cultural Sociology and the Aesthetic Public Sphere, Cultural Sociology 1(1). Kellner D (1990) Television and the Crisis of Democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview. Klein N (2002) No Logo: No Space, No Choice, No Jobs. New York: Picador. Li X (2007) Stages of a Crisis and Media Frames and Functions: U.S. Television Coverage of the 9/11 Incident during the First 24 Hours, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 51(4): 67087. Low S and Smith N (2006) The Politics of Public Space. New York: Taylor and Francis. Marcuse H (1968) Negations: Essays in Critical Theory. Boston: Beacon. Marcuse H (1972) Art and Revolution, Partisan Review 39. McClister N (2005) Paul Chan, Bomb Magazine 92 (summer). Rothenberg J and Kornblum W (2005) New Yorks Visual Art World after 9/11, in Foner N. (ed.) Wounded City: The Social Impact of 9/11. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Rothenberg J and Fine G.A (2008) Art Worlds and Their Ethnographers, in LArt au travail: special issue. Ethnologie Franaise (spring). Saltz J (2008) Seeing Dollar Signs. Available at: http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/ saltz/saltz1-29-07.asp Scott J (1990) Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Smith N and DeFilippis J (1999) The Reassertion of Economics: 1990s Gentrification from the Lower East Side, International Journal of Urban Research 23: 63853. Thussu D (2006) Televising the War on Terrorism: The Myths of Morality, in Kavoori A and Fraley T (eds) Media, Terrorism and Theory: A Reader. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield. Torres S (2008) Criminal Minds: Thinking and National Culture since 9/11, Review of Education, Pedagogy & Cultural Studies 30 (3/4): 27595. Wolff J (1999) Cultural Studies and the Sociology of Culture, Invisible Culture: An Electronic Journal for Visual Studies. Available at: http://www.rochester.edu/in_visible_culture/issue1/ wolff/wolff.html Zolberg V (1990) Constructing a Sociology of the Arts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zukin S (1982) Loft Living. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Julia Rothenberg holds an MFA in painting and a PhD in sociology. Her scholarly work incorporates theoretical and methodological approaches from a number of disciplines, including art history and aesthetics, philosophy, critical theory, and ethnography. She has written on the resonances

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

200

Cultural Sociology 6(2)

between feminist performance art and Theodor Adornos aesthetic theory, abstract expressionism and the Cold War, New Yorks art scene after 9/11, and the special issues that confront ethnographers of art worlds. Her work has appeared in a number of journals, including Social Justice, Telos, Ethnologie Franaise, Cultural Sociology and forthcoming in Visual Studies. She recently completed a book manuscript, which explores changes in the art world from the 1950s to the present, drawing on and critiquing categories developed by Adorno. She is currently working on an introductory text for the sociology of the arts. Julia is Assistant Professor of Sociology, Queensborough Community College, City University of New York.

Downloaded from cus.sagepub.com at Flinders University on April 20, 2013

You might also like