EVERYTHING (OLD WAS NEW) ALREADY: THEORIES, HISTORIES, AND POLITICS OF APPROPRIATION, CONTEMPORARY ART AND CULTURE by Riva Susan Symko A thesis submitted to the Department of Art In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (December, 2014) Copyright ©Riva Susan Symko, 2014 Abstract The past decade and a half of technological innovation and explosion of historical multiplicities have reignited the debates on appropriation. This dissertation contributes to the discussion for the purposes of understanding appropriation’s significance to our fluctuating conceptions of authenticity and originality, and to our long-standing cultural institutions (specifically, copyright). Critics of certain kinds of appropriation (like pastiche) have argued it is nothing more than a vague, empty form of mimicry, more closely related to theft than to creative production. On the other hand, advocates for certain kinds of appropriation (like parody, satire, or collage) have regarded it as a useful form of criticism and as a catalyst for inventing new modes of expression in a postmodern moment. Some of the most conspicuous and effecting conversations about appropriation and creative production have lately occurred in relation to intellectual property legislation. Although it is often taken for granted that copyright laws protect creative producers, this dissertation follows recent revelations in literary, and communications studies which have revealed the complex tension between these producers and the economically directed industries that are both driven by, and support those producers. This thesis updates arguments about appropriation for a contemporary context by critically examining these claims from a postcolonial, Marxist perspective considered largely through contemporary Western visual art, film, fashion, and music. This thesis argues that it cannot be predetermined as to whether acts of appropriation are wholly laudatory, or wholly critical. Instead, I argue that appropriation has always carried the ability to oscillate between both poles in an intertextual exchange that remains dependent on the variables of the viewer’s context and the artist’s production. However, this intertextuality is often impeded by our fetishization of artists and creative works, and by the institutions that benefit from those fetishes. ii Acknowledgements First and foremost I would like to acknowledge Dr. Clive Robertson for his considerable support to this research project. Over the past six years, his availability, encouragement, critiques, and friendship have provided me with the confidence and agency to seek out the methods and sources I needed to get this dissertation completed. Thank you, as well, to the members of my comprehensive research committee – Dr. Lynda Jessup, and Dr. Gary Kibbins – whose discussion and assessment of my topic has been generous and insightful, and to the members of my dissertation defence committee – Patrick Mahon, Dr. Laura Murray, Dr. Katherine Romba, and Dr. Janice Helland. I extend the thanks to Dr. John Hatch for guiding my Master’s degree, and to Dr. Steven Harris for the initial nudge into higher academia. I would also like to thank my Queen’s colleagues for sharing their camaraderie, commiseration, and conviviality – especially Dr. Amanda Morhart, Dr. Janina Knight, and Dr. Andrea Terry. I am especially grateful to my family, particularly my parents William and Heather Symko, for their unwavering belief in (and financial backing of) my academic pursuits. Finally, I am forever indebted to the personal support provided by my partner, Jonathan S. Green. iii Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ ii Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... iii Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ iv List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ vii Chapter 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research Topic and Questions ............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Theoretical Engagements ....................................................................................................... 2 1.2.1 Postmodernism: The Rhetoric of Contemporary Appropriation ..................................... 2 1.2.2 Aesthetic Theory: Authenticity and Originality .............................................................. 4 1.2.3 Postmodern Pastiche and Parody: Jameson vs. Hutcheon .............................................. 6 1.2.4 Late Capitalist Marxism: Appropriation as Production .................................................. 8 1.2.5 Politics: Postcolonial and Identity Issues ...................................................................... 10 1.3 Methods ............................................................................................................................... 10 1.3.1 Interdisciplinary Processes ............................................................................................ 10 1.3.2 Epistemological Issues .................................................................................................. 14 1.3.2.1 Historical Narratives: The Problem with Establishing a Beginning ...................... 14 1.3.2.2 Definitions: The Problem with Defining a Form ................................................... 17 1.4 Methodological Considerations ........................................................................................... 19 1.4.1 History of the Current Research Interests ..................................................................... 19 1.4.2 Rationale for Approach to Sources ............................................................................... 26 1.5 Description of Dissertation: Chapters .................................................................................. 29 Chapter 2 Theoretical Foundations – Authenticity and Intertextuality in Appropriation .............. 33 2.1 Authenticity ......................................................................................................................... 33 2.1.1 The Authenticity-Appropriation Paradox: Existential Authenticity for the Visual Arts ............................................................................................................................................... 33 2.1.2 Commodifiable Authentication: Material Constructions .............................................. 37 2.1.3 Authenticity via Reproduction: Intersections Between the Arts .................................. 42 2.1.4 Hierarchy in Authenticity: Class Constructions ............................................................ 50 2.1.5 Authenticity by Appropriated Association: Intersections between the Arts ................. 55 2.1.6 Authenticity as Labour: Socially Constructed Mimicry ............................................... 63 2.1.7 The Myth of Originality: Visual Art after Modernism ................................................. 67 iv 2.2 Intertextuality ....................................................................................................................... 73 2.2.1 Intertextuality and Mimesis: Naturally Occurring Appropriation................................. 73 2.2.2 Digital Textuality and Appropriation: The Emergence of Malleability ........................ 77 2.2.3 Passages in the Interstice: Separation and Dependency ................................................ 80 Chapter 3 The Pastiche Effect – Form and Content in Appropriation ........................................... 92 3.1 The Effect of Form............................................................................................................... 92 3.1.1 Postmodernism: The Rhetoric of Pictures .................................................................... 92 3.1.2 The ‘Postmodern’ Debate: Fredric Jameson vs. Linda Hutcheon ............................... 100 3.1.3 Reifying History: Appropriation in Lieu of ‘Real’ ..................................................... 106 3.1.4 Reified Appropriations: Self-Reflexive History ......................................................... 110 3.1.5 Pasticcio, Pastiche: A Brief History ............................................................................ 112 3.1.6 In Defence of Pastiche: Historicity ............................................................................. 120 3.2 The Affect of Content ........................................................................................................ 124 3.2.1 Sober Laughter: Pastiche as Humourless .................................................................... 124 3.2.2 Pastiche in the Interstice: Through the Lens of a Psycho ........................................... 129 3.2.3 Emotional Affect: Death Proof ................................................................................... 138 3.3 Form and the Broader Context ........................................................................................... 144 3.3.1 Historical Malleability: Pastiche as a Playground