BY MILENA BURZYWODA
An attempt to bring clarity into a muddled debate.
Over the last few decades the contemporary Culture Industry has cemented a small number of readymade definitions of art into the public consciousness -by now accepted as absolute standards which shape and control the production and reception of art to a near-total degree- and has in this process -tacitly- not only confused but redefined the idea and definition of what it means for an artist and art to be autonomous and free. The media in the UK have embraced the Culture Industry’s definitions and standards with particular enthusiasm and thus predominantly focus on -and promote- works, which are politically, correct, provide spectacle and shallow entertainment or define art as a currency. Whereas in Germany the increasing absence of autonomous art from the contemporary art world is at least occasionally taken note, the debate in the UK seems completely disinterested in or oblivious to this fact. However, even when the question of Kunstfreiheit/the freedom or art and the absence of autonomous art is the focus of the public debate in Germany, this situation is very much assessed and judged using the Culture Industry’s own logic, vocabulary and pre-defined standards. Thus a critical distance is not only diminished but has become close to impossible.
The following is an attempt to clarify and define what substantiates freedom and autonomy in art and to highlight the vacuum that is produced by the absence of autonomous art from the public realm.