THE VALUE OF DISTANCE: ART’S CULTURAL IDENTITY AMIDST TECHNOLOGY’S TRANSFORMATIONS OF SPACE By David Hadlow Ogle Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Liverpool School of the Arts May 2018 II ABSTRACT THE VALUE OF DISTANCE: ART’S CULTURAL IDENTITY AMIDST TECHNOLOGY’S TRANSFORMATIONS OF SPACE By David Hadlow Ogle This study explores technology’s propensity to transform our comprehensions of space, considering the implications of this for our understandings of the work of art and the value that we ascribe to it. With our encounters increasingly a by-product of technological interface, the central question of this work is posed as follows: In what ways (and to what degree) may we regard the contemporary conditions facing the art object (and the values that these elicit) as a consequence of our prevailing technological landscape and its capacity to re-configure our conceptions of space and place? In confronting this, the study begins by surveying recent public justifications made for the arts and the criteria by which their value is ascertained. A trend is recognised, in the growing prevalence of instrumental qualifiers for art’s worth (its quantifiable impacts as a social utility) and a shift away from intrinsic measures. In response to this, I propose the concept of Accumulative Value, arguing that the totality of an art object’s intellectual considerations and explorations (over historical time) are an intrinsic attribute of the object itself and a qualifier of its objective worth. The notion of value itself (with its varying interpretations) is then explored, followed by a contemporary re-evaluation of Walter Benjamin’s concept of the aura, arguing that in our present circumstances this notion may be used in description of an object’s fixed spatial locality. The degree to which technologies of telepresence undermine such locality is then examined, noting trends in technological progression toward an abolition of distance, in both a spatial and temporal sense, that diminish our ability to recognise Accumulative Value. In consummation, it is proposed that technologies, as Competitive Cognitive Artefacts, may play a role in manifesting a situation in which the intrinsic measures of art’s worth are progressively disregarded, yet, that the auric artwork can come to fulfil a timely imperative, in reconnecting us to a somatic relationship with space and a linear understanding of time; such perceivable phenomena that are jeopardised by technological transformations. III DECLARATION I hereby certify that this thesis constitutes my own product, that where the language of others is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate credit is given where I have used the language, ideas, expressions or writings of another. I declare that the thesis describes original work that has not previously been presented for the award of any other degree of any institution. Signed, David Hadlow Ogle IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Numerous organisations and individuals have assisted in shaping the following work, in each instance their time and support has been greatly appreciated. These (by no means exhaustive) acknowledgements recognise a number of prominent contributions. Firstly, I would like to express my gratitude to FACT (Foundation for Art and Creative Technology) and the institution’s sustained enthusiasm for collaboration as the partner organisation for my research. FACT’s prominent position within Liverpool’s cultural landscape is a testament to dedication, camaraderie and forward-thinking mentality of its staff; having a base within such an environment for the tenure of my PhD has been continually rewarding. Particular mention must be given to Mike Stubbs (Director/CEO), Roger McKinley (Research and Innovation Manager) and Anna Botella (Programme Producer), each for their openness, generosity and willingness to engage in challenged discussion of ideas; their expertise has proved invaluable. Many of the University of Liverpool’s academics, support staff and my fellow researchers must also receive acknowledgement, including; Aneta Krzemien Barkley and Jane Clayton for their advice and shared experiences of collaborative doctoral research, Prof Andre Brown for his impactful direction (particularly within the first year of research) and Dr Panayiota Vassilopoulou for her support of my teaching within the university’s School of Philosophy. These, in addition to a great many other staff members, have made my experiences at the university truly outstanding. In relation to my work as a practicing artist, I would also like to pay credit to a number of individuals (and their respective organisations) who have enabled the production of creative works featured within (and informed by) this study, these include; Claire Mander (Deputy Director & Curator – The Royal British Society of Sculptors), Dianne Harris (Founding Director & Curator - Kinetica Museum), Anne de Charmant (Director -Meadow Arts) and Arts Council England (ACE) for their granting of support to several of my artistic projects during my research. Significantly, I would like to acknowledge Mark Devereux (Director - Mark Devereux Projects) for his long running support and representation of my artistic practice. The Arts and Humanities Research Council’s (AHRC) granting of this Collaborative Doctoral Award (CDA) has enabled me to realise numerous ambitions that would have proved difficult in its absence, I am grateful for the confidence and commitment to collaborative working demonstrated by the AHRC in their supporting of this studentship. Lastly, I would like to thank my primary supervisor Prof Richard Koeck. Whatever merits this work may possess, they are a consequence of my sustained dialogue with Richard over the past several years of this research and his continual affirmation that this writing could prove to be something of worth. I have felt privileged to work alongside him and been influenced by the values he expresses as an academic; ones to which I often fall short but have been emboldened to aspire. For his guidance, his impassioned affinity with ideas and seemingly limitless resources of patience and pragmatism, it is Richard to whom any virtues of this work are not merely credited, but dedicated. V VI TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..III DECLARATION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………...V LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS………………………………………………….……………………............................................VIII PREFACE TO THE VALUE OF DISTANCE: After the Ascent…..…………………………………........................................1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………...9 CHAPTER ONE: JUSTIFYING CULTURE…………………………………………………………………………………...13 I. Current reporting on the value of arts and culture……………………………………………………………………………….15 II. The virtues of elitism………………………………………………………………………………............................................25 III. The question concerning technology…………………………………………………………………………………………...42 PREFACE TO CHAPTER II: Turning Down Prometheus: on the maintenance of values in a Brave New World….………...55 CHAPTER TWO: VALUE AND VALUES…………………………………………………………………………………….63 I. Etymology………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..65 II. Objective vs. subjective approaches…………………………………………………………………………………………….68 III. Acknowledging truths………………………………………………………………………………………………………….77 IV. On scarcity……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..82 CHAPTER THREE: THE AURA: DISTANCE & LONGING…………….…………………...…………………………….85 I. A return to the climb………………………………………………………………………………..............................................87 II. The aura…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………91 III. The hero in the distance………………………………………………………………………….............................................101 CHAPTER FOUR: TECHNOLOGY: THE FRANTIC ABOLITION OF DISTANCE..…….............................................115 I. Speed equals distance over time…………………………………….………………………………………………………….118 II. On homogenisation………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………128 III. Practice Based Exploration…………………………………………………………………………………………………...130 - 1. The Drawing Room………………………………………………………………………………………………...131 - 2. Human Futures………………………………………………………………………………………………..……135 - 3. Site-based installation……………………………………………………………………………………………....145 - 4. Loomings…………………………………………………………………………………………...........................150 IV. Interface……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….152 CONCLUSION…....…………………………….……………………………………………………………………………….159 BIBLIOGRPAHY…....…………………………….……………………………………………………………………………..171 APPENDICES....…………………………….……………………………………………………..……………………………..177 VII LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PREFACE TO THE VALUE OF DISTANCE Fig 0.1: Bill Anders (NASA - Apollo 8) | Earthrise | 1968 Retrieved from: https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_1249.html CHAPTER ONE: JUSTIFYING CULTURE Fig 1.1: Arts Council England | The Value of Arts and Culture to People and Society | 2014 Retrieved from: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/exploring-value-arts-and-culture/value-arts-and-culture-people-and-society Fig 1.2: Yves Klein | IKB79 – paint on canvas on plywood | 1959 Retrieved from: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/klein-ikb-79-t01513 Fig 1.3: Giovanni d' Enrico (statues), Gaudenzio Ferrari (fresco) | Lamentation over the Dead Christ – Cappelle del Sacro Monte di Varallo | 1635 Retrieved from: http://www.sacromontedivarallo.it/DOCS/EL_48_CAPPELLA%2040.JPG Fig 1.4: Google