| OCR Text |
Show Rationality and the Structure of the Self, Volume II: A Kantian Conception 465 The impersonality, impenetrability, and inherent internal equilibrium of an art object can be a distinct advantage in attacking political discrimination through the cultivation of cognitive discrimination. A human subject who deploys these strategies in other interpersonal contexts is vulnerable to criticism by a participant who feels that the leader, trainer or therapist is "reacting personally" to him: who just doesn't like him, is personally attacking him, manipulating him, or projecting her own problems onto him. And in this type of situation, such criticisms may be justified. But in an art context, they cannot be. For unlike human subjects, an art object cannot have reactions to, intentions toward or designs of any kind on a viewer; and a fortiori, cannot have personal reactions, intentions or designs on any particular viewer. So although it may happen that a particularly insecure or provincial art viewer initially may feel moved to accuse the work of art of manipulating her, ridiculing her, trying to pull the wool over her eyes, guilt-tripping her, attacking her, etc., it will not require too much reflection on the viewer's part to conclude, finally, that this is not the kind of thing an art object, unlike a human subject, has the capacity to do. Nor will it require much more reflection on the viewer's part to conclude that, if she does indeed feel that the work is doing these things to her, these feelings can only be the result of magical thinking and personal projection of her own emotions onto the object; and that this response itself is worth her scrutiny. An important benefit of utilizing art objects to combat higher-order political discrimination, then, is that they enable the viewer to discriminate cognitively between what she sees and what she is. Is there a difference between fine art and commercial art in this respect? Is the latter not clearly manipulative in intent? Not if we distinguish, in the case of art as well as of advertising, between the creator's intentions in producing the work, and its psychological effects on its viewers. Like advertisers, artists of course have intentions in producing a particular work. Typically, an advertiser's intention in producing a commercial is to get the consumer to buy the product, whereas an artist's intention in producing a work of art may be to get the viewer to reflect on his political or aesthetic attitudes. In both cases, these intentions can be distinguished from the psychological effects of the work on its recipient. An advertiser who pairs a beautiful woman with a certain make of car in order to get consumers to buy that make of car may intend to enhance the appeal of that make of car to consumers. That a particular consumer comes to hate his wife because he has a different make of car is not necessarily part of the advertiser's intention. Similarly, an artist who pairs depiction of the homeless with standard stereotypical rationalizations for ignoring them may intend to get viewers to reflect on their economic priorities. That a particular viewer feels guiltstricken because she has been making contributions to her alma mater instead of to the homeless is not necessarily part of the artist's intention. Any © Adrian Piper Research Archive Foundation Berlin |
