The Violent Aesthetic: A Reconsideration of Transgressive Body Art

Developing John Dewey's thought regarding the unity of body and mind and his criticism of traditional notions of aesthetic experience, Richard Shusterman has proposed a discipline of aesthetics (somaesthetics), the purpose of which is to foster inquiry into the aesthetic dimensions of the human body. ¹ These agreements aside, Shusterman is critical of Dewey's emphasis on the consummatory phase of aesthetic experience, that is, the phase in which the elements of an experience culminate in a fulfilling and organic moment that punctuates the flow of everyday life. Martin Jay too develops this line of criticism by arguing that aesthetic experience need not be consummatory in nature and that, with regard to somaesthetic experience, there are a wide array of "transgressive body techniques" that are just as aesthetically valuable as the kinds of experiences advocated by Dewey. Further, Jay argues that these techniques also perform an important political function since they draw attention to the violence that underlies the democratic process, reveal that there are alternatives to a rather homogenous public sphere, and illustrate the need for political criticism. ² Since Dewey held that aesthetic experience is essential for a democratic culture, it seems, then, that he would indeed espouse the work of transgressive body artists since such work can be seen as contributing to the pursuit of a democratic culture. For these reasons, Jay concludes that even though they are blatantly nonconsummatory in nature, transgressive body techniques have both aesthetic and political value and should not be dismissed outright.

In this essay I will address Jay's argument first by assessing the aesthetic value of transgressive body techniques and then will go on to say something about their political efficacy. Taking the work of Orlan as my example, I will argue that such techniques have minimal aesthetic value and that what aesthetic value they do have is mitigated by their primarily critical aims. I will also suggest that traditional performance arts such as dance and theatre also utilize the body, but do so in a manner that is more conducive to the realization of a democratic culture.

I.

It can be argued that the central task of Dewey's Art as Experience is to give an account of aesthetic experience that does justice to its richness and distinctness and yet avoids the traditional tendency to conceptually divorce it from everyday life. He does this by arguing that everyday experience can be rendered aesthetic when it is consciously led to organic ends. When this happens there is a "conversion of resistance and tensions, of excitations that in themselves are temptations to diversions, into movement toward an inclusive and fulfilling close" (1934, 56). This conversion renders aesthetic experiences distinct from those that are either inchoate or overtly repetitious in nature. They stand out from these extremes because they are intrinsically meaningful and because they are contingent upon the work of intelligence. That is, every instance of significant aesthetic experience is contingent upon a process of problem solving, for in designing experience, intelligence must mete out difficulty. This is why aesthetic experience, for Dewey, is important for a democratic culture, as consummatory experience and the purposive activity that it is contingent upon is necessary for a public not only because it renders life meaningful, but also because the intelligence that is needed in order to bring it about is akin to the social intelligence necessary for the resolution of social problems. ³

II.

As mentioned, Jay examines the implications of the work of "performance artists who have experimented in often transgressive and provocative ways with their own bodies" (2003, 166) ⁴ in order to enact social criticism. Indeed, although there are many variations on the artistic direction of violence toward the body, there are central themes. First, the art industry and its temple—the museum—are called into question by performances that purposefully escape the fetishization that often accompanies original and unreproducible works of art such as paintings, sculptures, and buildings. Second, because they are violent and/or disgusting in nature, these performances make the psychological phenomenon of aesthetic distance impossible. No doubt, it is difficult to...