6.4 However, equally paradoxically, contemporary visual art, as opposed to every other type of creative labor (music, film, acting, graphic design, cake decoration) has no specific medium—that is, no specific form of labor—attached to it; when you say that you are an “artist,” you imply nothing about the specific character of your work (contemporary art, in this way, is a kind of reductio ad absurdum of the idea of creative individuality).
6.5 This lack of definition is in inverse proportion to the extreme hyper-definition of labor in a variety of other contemporary creative industries—video games, film, and television all involve creative labor employed on a massive, impersonal, and very specialized level.
6.6 Because capitalist relations of production are the dominant relations of production and these other “creative industries” are more fully organized around capitalist production, they also have a more central importance to contemporary society—they are at the center of innovation, investment, and public attention on a level with which the sphere of the visual arts cannot by itself compete.
6.7 Nevertheless, while it cannot compete with these industries, contemporary art takes on its significance in relation to them—while they represent creativity tailored to capitalist specifications, the sphere of the visual arts generates its cachet precisely as the sphere in which individual quality and intellectual independence are preserved (in much the same way that politicians avoid talking about the working class by talking endlessly about the importance of the middle class, an exaggerated intellectual significance is given to the importance of the middle-class “art world” to escape the reality of the extent to which contemporary creativity is dominated by impersonal industry).
6.8 The visual arts, in relation to visual culture or culture in general, thus finds itself with few stable paths. It can attempt to merge with these other, fully capitalist creative spheres, but only as a junior partner—it does so at the cost of giving up its reason for existing as a separate, privileged sphere at all, which is that it represents autonomous creativity not directed by the pure profit motive.
6.9 On the other hand, contemporary visual art also faces a dilemma if it does not engage with other, more dominant creative industries; in that case, its audience becomes narrowed to only the very rich and those who have the privilege to have been educated in its traditions, which makes clear the narrow horizon, and, consequently, lack of freedom within which this supposedly free form of expression maneuvers.
7.0 Art criticism, to be relevant, should be based on an analysis of the actual situation of art and the different values at play, which are related to different classes [this point simply draws the conclusion, for criticism, of 1.9].
7.1 Art criticism is itself a middle-class discipline, based on norms of individual intellectual expression; since relevant art criticism involves analysis of the actual class situation of art, it involves transcending purely subjective, individual, professional opinion.
7.2 However, transcending purely “subjective” criticism does not imply the false “objectivity” of art criticism that imposes a philosophical or political program on art; this sort of scholastic criticism equally implies a middle-class perspective (often one based in the academy), insofar as it advances a purely abstract, intellectual program and fails to address the actual social situation of the visual arts (for example, simply insisting that art “be political” without seriously analyzing for whom or to what ends “political art” is directed actually reinforces the framework of individualistic, professional expression).
7.3 Acknowledging that contemporary art has a middle-class character is not the same as denouncing the sphere of the visual arts for “petit-bourgeois decadence”; one must judge art in terms of the contradictory values given to it by competing class interests, which in part means recognizing the sphere of the visual arts as a significant repository of legitimate hopes for self-expression. Insofar as contemporary society thwarts or distorts self-expression, the urge to follow one’s own creative path can itself be a political impulse.
7.4 However, the middle-class character of the visual arts does mean that this sphere is faced with certain dilemmas [see, for instance, 3.8, 3.9, 6.8, 6.9] that cannot be resolved within that sphere itself as it is currently constituted [4.5, 4.6]; a realistic and effective critical worldview starts from this standpoint.
7.5 Artistic quality is not something that can be judged independently of questions of class and the present balance of class forces because different classes have different values for art that imply different criteria of success [see theses 2, 3, 4].
7.6 Insofar as different class influences are at play in the visual arts, an artwork is never reducible to one meaning; quite often, artworks amount to compromises, attempting to resolve a number of different influences into a single artistic formula (a work might, for instance, be executed in a style that is attractive to art collectors, but also attempt to put an original professional signature on it and at the same time express some type of sincere political solidarity).
7.7 To state that every contemporary work of art will by definition be a product of contemporary society and thus bear the marks of the contradictions of its actual material situation does not imply that all art can be reduced to the same problem. Effective art criticism implies having a dynamic analysis of how specific aesthetic values are related to the present balance of forces and making a judgment with regard to what factors are playing the most crucial role at any given moment with any given work.
7.8 There is an aspect of taste that implies nothing political and is simply the product of personal experience and history (that is, there is no contradiction if two people have the same political analysis of the world but different aesthetic preferences). But such judgments are of secondary importance here. “I liked this” is a legitimate opinion, but it is not criticism that is serious, interesting, or useful.
7.9 Art criticism is not political because it imposes a political framework on contemporary art but because accurately representing art’s real situation implies understanding the dilemmas of middle-class creative labor in a capitalist world [see 3.8, 3.9] and, therefore, implies a political critique of that setup.
8.0 The relative strength of different values of art within the sphere of the visual arts is the product of a specific balance of class forces; there can be more or less progressive situations for contemporary art, even in a capitalist world, depending on the strengths of these different classes and what demands they are able to advance.
8.1 These demands, to be effective, should be organically connected to actual struggle—they cannot be an abstract program cooked up by a few and imposed as a program for art without any connection to actual movements within that sphere. Nevertheless, some provisional suggestions can be advanced, flowing from the analysis in the preceding theses. All of the following ideas have some support and expression, currently—the trick is to extend such initiatives to the point where they become more than purely symbolic gestures [thus fitting the criteria of 2.8] and are strong enough to shift the dominant values of art.
8.2 Above all, private capital has disproportionate influence on the visual arts; therefore, increased public funding for arts institutions can have the effect of reducing the intensity of the contradiction facing the visual arts.
8.3 Such institutions should be democratically accountable to the communities they serve, so as not to replicate the effect of top-down influence on art through bureaucratic directives; currently existing institutions should be made more democratic; institutions should pay the artists they exhibit, rather than exploiting artists’ professional aspirations by extracting free work from them.
8.4 Art’s current definition as a luxury good, or as the primary concern of a specific professional sphere, limits its full significance. Programs should be launched and supported that offer venues for artistic activity that are not necessarily aimed at the rich or already initiated.
8.5 Research and critical projects should be funded that investigate, explore, and support, on a large scale, alternative definitions and sites for creativity; “art” is not always produced