As a consequence of its idealist heritage, art history has long neglected a whole range of productions that were considered minor, because mass-produced. While modernity invented the hierarchy of genres, traditional societies attributed specific functions artefacts, regardless of how they were made. In the Middle Ages, the serial method of production was considered more valuable, since it guaranteed authenticity (seals), good currency, protection and benefits (pilgrimage badges), not to mention the status of consecrated hosts. The different processes that led to a "resemblance by contact" (Didi Hubermann) can be implemented on a very wide range of materials, which have their own physical and symbolical qualities.
The aim of this session is to question the different cultural uses attached to fragile, ductile and/or consumable materials in order to deconstruct the categories that separate élite art learned from the popular one, the large from the small, the unique from the serial. In order to feed the reflection, we wish to involve into the sessions researchers that are working on production from all continents, and that come from different disciplines (art history, archaeology, archaemoetry, anthropology, etc.).
The papers will be organised around three main axes: 1- stamping, 2- moulding, 3- consumption of images. The presentations will be followed by a round tables.
Produce truth : stamping
The idea of the "truth" of the material will be questioned. In the case of the seal, for example, the sealing operates in a single gesture a double transformation, that of an inert material into an effective sign and that of an element of discourse into a legal act. The gesture of striking, pressing or moulding as a gesture of truth, a gesture that consecrates the material as a guarantee of authenticity, should be questioned; the physical involvement of the practitioner should also be examined.
A transient transformation of the material
This axis will focus on productions that require a transitory transformation of the material to accommodate the form (plaster, gypsum, cement). This process implies that the liquefied material, recovering its primitive material nature, adopts the form that the mould imposes on it. The following transformation concerns not the material itself but its surface that can be painted, gilded, etc. What is the status of the surface ornament in the context of serial production?
Consumed works: questioning the tool
The last axis will address categories of objects mainly ignored by art historians, i.e. serial works that are designed and produced to be consumed. This process of consumption necessarily implies the disappearance of the work, even though the tool, that maked it, persists. The status of these consumed objects and the tools used to produce them can be examined, as well as the iconography: what is the value of the ornament on these consumed objects? This axis could be an opportunity to question the transgression that this type of consumption represents (symbolic anthropophagy). We could also question the heritage status of the tool. When can a mould become a work of art?
Talks :
