User:Nicole Hametner/Reading, Writing & Research Methodologies 2013-02

Personal thoughts about cultural hegemony and leadership

The mechanism in the art market can be used as an example among many others of how cultural hegemony indicates. Only a round of prominent actors evaluates a specific selection and guide the definition of it to a certain direction. This appears with the problematic system of a jury for all kinds of competitions as well as with the big art fairs, what uncovers the power of the material force of significant and wealthy galleries. Although more and more “off-spaces” and “off-festivals” figure as alternative, this only underlines a formation in different “classes”. The part of art schools is not uninvolved in that appearance of selection and modeling dominant ideas. That’s why the role of the artist as possible counter position becomes all the more important, as an engaged figure who investigates and see behind the leading structure to then mediate the uncover and contribute to a wider awareness about the regnant system. Marx statement about the members of the class that are passive receptors of the illusion is highly current today and might increase with the technical progress that allows to spread the illusions of the “thinkers” in every corner of the public and private sphere. What makes this system all the more efficient is the gathering of power. Different fields in society merge closer together and blur the comprehension of their elementary function for each individual. The reciprocal manipulation from the food industry and the health care is only one example to mention. Within this controlling network, the constant spreading of fear and false information make docile and construct artificial needs. All that, embraced by the rising depth, increases dependence takes away the autonomy and separates thereby each individual from its integrity. The story repeats itself during history. As a clear example serves the French revolution, where the political and social changes created a big destabilization in society. A consciousness of the powerlessness of the individual was created, which then lost it in the big ideologies. (Dietrich Schwanitz, Fürchtet euch immer) But who stands behind the circle of power that seems to rule the world? The term of leadership implies a personification of power. Is this embodiment of the concept like Marx proposed it conceivable? And can in that complex network really an ultimate aim be identified? Maybe there is not a specific group that threats and what should rather be challenged is the idea of the reigning system itself. The fact that everyone in the big mass is concerned has been so far not sufficient for an evolution, as long as there is no awareness about the proper confinement and no faith in a vision of a completely different system. However it probably still might at this time exceed our imagination and rational deadlocked materialistic based convictions in order to find the power and courage that leads to a change.