Banksy, Kurt Cobain, and The Paradox That Claimed Them

Summary

The video script explores the paradoxical trap of commodification in art and culture, using Kurt Cobain and Banksy as case studies. It delves into how capitalism has permeated the subconscious, turning even protest into a marketable commodity. The script critiques the art market's focus on investment over artistic value, suggesting that true appreciation of art lies in its intrinsic qualities, not its potential as an asset. It concludes by urging viewers to recognize and challenge the spectacle-driven culture that commodifies even dissent.

Takeaways

• 🔄 **Paradoxes as Traps**: The script discusses how certain paradoxes, like trying to force sleep or calm, can backfire and become mental traps.
• 🎨 **Commodification of Art**: It highlights the commodification of art and artists, using Kurt Cobain and Banksy as examples of how their struggles and protests were turned into marketable commodities.
• 🤔 **Capitalist Realism**: The script references Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism' to explain how capitalism has seeped into every aspect of life, including dreams and creativity.
• 🏛️ **Art Market Critique**: Banksy's disdain for the art market is explored, showing how his work, intended as a critique, is often co-opted by the market he criticizes.
• 💸 **Value Over Quality**: The focus on the financial value of art over its intrinsic qualities is criticized, suggesting that this detracts from the true appreciation of art.
• 🖼️ **Art as Investment**: The script points out the trend of buying art as an investment rather than for personal enjoyment, which can devalue the art itself.
• 🔴 **Banksy's Shredding Stunt**: The act of shredding 'Girl with Balloon' after its auction is discussed as a powerful anti-art market statement that paradoxically increased its value.
• 🌐 **Spectacle of Critique**: The idea that any form of protest or critique within a commodified system can be turned into a spectacle that serves the system is explored.
• 🔮 **Inescapable System**: The script suggests that within a capitalist system, it's nearly impossible for artists to critique or escape the very system that profits from them.
• 📚 **Recommended Reading**: The video concludes with a recommendation to read 'Capitalist Realism' and 'Societe du Spectacle' to better understand and identify the spectacle in daily life.

Q & A

What is the paradox described in the script where the more you try to achieve something, the more difficult it becomes?

The paradox mentioned in the script refers to situations where efforts to achieve a goal inadvertently make it harder to accomplish. Examples include trying to fall asleep, calming someone down, or avoiding thinking about something specific. These paradoxes can trap individuals, leading to discomfort or hindering personal expression.

How does the script connect Kurt Cobain's struggle with the paradox of capitalism?

The script connects Kurt Cobain's struggle with the paradox of capitalism by illustrating how Cobain's angst and rebellion were commodified and turned into marketable products, thereby making him part of the system he was rebelling against. His protests and even his suicide added to his commodification, making his struggle futile within the capitalist framework.

What is the significance of the quote from Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism' in the context of the script?

The quote from Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism' is significant as it highlights the pervasive influence of capitalism on culture and individual consciousness. It suggests that even expressions of rebellion are absorbed and repackaged by the capitalist system, rendering them ineffective in bringing about real change.

How does the script use Banksy's work to critique the commodification of art?

The script uses Banksy's work to critique the commodification of art by discussing how his art, which often criticizes the art market, is itself turned into a valuable commodity. This includes his 'Girl with Balloon' self-destructing as a protest against the art market, which paradoxically increased its value.

What is the 'spectacle' mentioned in the script, and how does it relate to Cobain and Banksy?

The 'spectacle' refers to the commodification of experiences and events into consumable, often superficial, forms of entertainment. In the context of Cobain and Banksy, it relates to how their protests and art become part of the spectacle, losing their critical edge and instead contributing to the systems they criticize.

Why does the script argue that Banksy's protest against the art market is ultimately self-defeating?

The script argues that Banksy's protest against the art market is self-defeating because, within the capitalist system, his protest becomes a spectacle that adds value to his work and the art market itself. His acts of defiance are commodified and turned into marketable events, thus empowering the system he seeks to criticize.

What does the script suggest about the relationship between art and its value in the capitalist system?

The script suggests that in the capitalist system, art is often appreciated more for its potential to generate wealth or its investment value rather than for its intrinsic qualities like beauty or challenging nature. This focus on value over artistic merit can distort the appreciation and creation of art.

How does the script analyze the impact of commodification on the authenticity of artistic expression?

The script analyzes the impact of commodification on artistic expression by showing how it can lead to a loss of authenticity and a focus on market value over creative intent. This can result in artists being trapped in a paradox where their work is valued more for its marketability than its artistic integrity.

What is the role of the art market in shaping the perception of art, according to the script?

According to the script, the art market plays a significant role in shaping the perception of art by promoting it as an investment rather than an expression of creativity. This focus on financial gain can overshadow the artistic value, leading to a distorted appreciation of the work.

How does the script use the concept of 'spectacle' to critique contemporary culture?

The script uses the concept of 'spectacle' to critique contemporary culture by suggesting that experiences, including artistic ones, are increasingly mediated and commodified, turning them into consumable entertainment. This leads to a detachment from the real value and meaning of these experiences, reducing them to mere commodities.

What recommendations does the script make for those interested in understanding the impact of capitalism on culture?

The script recommends reading Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism' and Guy Debord's 'Societe du Spectacle' to gain a deeper understanding of how capitalism shapes cultural experiences and the commodification of daily life.

Outlines

00:00

🔄 Paradoxes and the Commodification of Art

The first paragraph delves into the concept of paradoxes, using examples such as the struggle to fall asleep or calming an agitated person, and extends this idea to the paradoxical nature of art and artists within a capitalist society. It discusses how Kurt Cobain's struggle with his commodification and the art market's transformation of art into a commodity are indicative of a larger issue. The paragraph quotes Mark Fisher from his book 'Capitalist Realism' to illustrate how capitalism has permeated every aspect of life, including dreams and art, and how Cobain's angst was turned into a marketable product. It also introduces Banksy, another artist caught in this paradox, whose work and protests against the art market and capitalism are commodified and turned into spectacles, thus inadvertently empowering the systems they critique.

05:03

🎨 The Art Market and the Spectacle of Critique

The second paragraph explores the impact of the art market on artists, particularly those who are not part of the mainstream or do not aspire to an international career. It criticizes the market's focus on investment and reselling, which devalues art that cannot be resold at a profit. The paragraph suggests that true art collectors value the work itself, not its potential as an investment. It then discusses Banksy's famous shredding of 'Girl with Balloon' as a protest against the art market, arguing that such acts, while seemingly rebellious, only add to the spectacle and value of the art world. The paragraph concludes by reflecting on the broader implications of commodification and spectacle in society, where even anti-establishment actions are incorporated and sold back to the public, rendering them ineffective.

10:05

🚫 The Inescapable Spectacle of Capitalism

The third paragraph concludes the video script by emphasizing the futility of artists' attempts to critique institutions they are deeply integrated with, using the examples of Kurt Cobain and Banksy. It suggests that their protests and criticisms are absorbed and commodified by the very systems they oppose, turning their acts into meaningless spectacles. The paragraph ponders the implications of this dynamic, questioning whether an artist can truly criticize an institution they are part of without losing their power. It ends with a call to action for viewers to read Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism' and Guy Debord's 'Societe du Spectacle' to recognize the spectacle in their own lives, and it leaves the audience with a hopeful note from Fisher's book, suggesting that from a seemingly static situation, new possibilities can emerge.

Keywords

💡Paradox

A paradox is a statement or situation that seems contradictory or absurd but in fact expresses a possible truth. In the video, the paradox is exemplified by the idea that the more one tries to achieve something (like falling asleep or calming down), the more it eludes them. This concept is used to introduce the theme of feeling trapped and the subsequent discussion on how certain societal structures can create similar traps for individuals, particularly artists like Kurt Cobain and Banksy.

💡Commodification

Commodification refers to the process of transforming something into a commodity, which is treated as an item for trade or financial gain. The video discusses how the angst of artists like Kurt Cobain was commodified, turning his emotional expression into a marketable product. This process is critiqued as it reduces the authenticity of art and emotion, aligning them with commercial interests rather than their intrinsic value.

💡Capitalist Realism

Capitalist realism is a term coined by Mark Fisher to describe the dominant belief system in which capitalism is perceived as the only viable economic system and cultural paradigm. The video uses this concept to analyze how capitalism has seeped into every aspect of life, including the subconscious, and how it shapes the cultural landscape, making even anti-capitalist sentiments part of the spectacle it promotes.

💡Spectacle

The spectacle, as discussed in the video, refers to the visual and media-driven phenomena that dominate modern culture, often overshadowing the reality or substance behind the images. It is used to describe how events, including artistic protests like Banksy's shredding of 'Girl with Balloon', become more about the visual display and less about the message or critique they intend to convey.

💡Art Market

The art market is the economic system within which art is bought, sold, and appraised. The video criticizes the art market for turning art into a speculative investment rather than valuing it for its aesthetic or cultural significance. This commodification of art is seen as detrimental to the appreciation of art for its own sake and to the livelihood of artists who do not cater to this market.

💡Cobain

Kurt Cobain, the lead singer of Nirvana, is mentioned as an artist who was trapped by the paradox of capitalist realism. His struggle with the commodification of his angst and the spectacle of his protest against MTV is used to illustrate the broader theme of artists being unable to escape the systems they critique.

💡Banksy

Banksy is a street artist known for his anonymous identity and provocative works that often critique the art world and societal norms. The video discusses Banksy's acts of protest, such as the self-destruction of 'Girl with Balloon', as examples of how even the most potent critiques can be absorbed and commodified by the systems they aim to challenge.

💡Protest

Protest in the video is depicted as an act of expressing dissent or resistance against an established system or norm. It is used to analyze the ineffectiveness of protest within a system that can co-opt and commodify any form of dissent, turning it into a spectacle that serves the system rather than dismantling it.

💡Societe du Spectacle

Societe du Spectacle, or 'The Society of the Spectacle', is a philosophical work by Guy Debord that critiques the spectacle as a dominant feature of modern capitalist society. The video references this concept to discuss how the spectacle can neutralize and incorporate critique, rendering it impotent.

💡Alienation

Alienation in the video refers to the sense of disconnection and powerlessness that individuals may feel in a society dominated by spectacle and commodification. It is used to describe the emotional and psychological state of artists like Cobain and Banksy, who feel trapped and unable to authentically express themselves or critique the systems that co-opt their work.

💡Investment

In the context of the video, investment refers to the practice of purchasing art not for its aesthetic or cultural value but for its potential to appreciate in value over time. This approach to art is critiqued for prioritizing financial gain over artistic appreciation and for contributing to the devaluation of art that does not serve as a good investment.

Highlights

The paradox of trying to force actions leading to the opposite effect, such as the harder it gets to fall asleep the more you try.

Paradoxes can trap and prevent individuals from reaching their full potential, including artistic aspirations.

Kurt Cobain was a victim of the paradox where his angst was commodified, turning his protests into a product.

Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism' discusses capitalism's colonization of the dreaming life and its impact on Cobain.

The art market turns art into commodities, which can hinder genuine appreciation for its power and beauty.

Banksy's work critiques the art market, yet his protests inadvertently add value to the system he criticizes.

Banksy's shredding of 'Girl with Balloon' was a powerful anti-art market stunt that still contributed to his commodification.

Capitalism can incorporate and commodify even anti-capitalist ideas, making them part of the spectacle.

The art market and wealthy buyers are not threatened by Banksy's critiques; they are part of the spectacle.

The commodification of experiences and artists turns their protests into mere entertainment.

Banksy's identity and graffiti are part of the spectacle that the art world commodifies and sells.

Banksy's integration into the art world makes his criticism of it seem insincere and part of the spectacle.

The art world's power to turn criticism into spectacle makes it feel untouchable and unchangeable.

Reading Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism' and Guy Debord's 'Societe du Spectacle' can help identify the spectacle in our lives.

The final message of 'Capitalist Realism' suggests a possibility of change from a seemingly static situation.

Transcripts

I hate the feeling of being trapped in a paradox.

For instance, the more you tell yourself to fall asleep, the harder it gets.

The more you tell someone who’s agitated to calm down, the more agitated they get.

The more I tell you to not think of a Blue Dog, the more you think of Blue Dog.

These paradoxes can become traps when you don’t know how to get out of them.

It can feel extremely uncomfortable when you’re stuck in one of them.

It can be terrible to not be able to sleep at night, but what if one of these paradoxes

prevent you from being who you are, what if they prevent you from being the artist you

want to be.

Kurt Cobain was a prominent victim of this paradox and this trap has claimed yet another

victim, Banksy.

I’m going to read you a lengthy quote from Mark Fisher’s Capitalist Realism on Kurt

Cobain, but it’s worth it, I promise:

“Capitalism seemingly occupies the horizons of the thinkable.

[Frederic] Jameson used to report in horror about the ways that capitalism had seeped

into the very unconscious; now, the fact that capitalism has colonized the dreaming life

of the population is so taken for granted that it is no longer worthy of comment.

[…] Witness, for instance, the establishment of settled ‘alternative’ or ‘independent’

cultural zones, which endlessly repeat older gestures of rebellion and contestation as

if for the first time.

‘Alternative’ and ‘independent’ don’t designate something outside the mainstream

culture; rather, they are styles, in fact the dominant styles, within the mainstream.

No-one embodied (and struggled with) this deadlock more than Kurt Cobain and Nirvana.

In his dreadful lassitude and objectless rage, Cobain seemed to give wearied voice to the

despondency of the generation that had come after history, whose every move was anticipated,

tracked, bought and sold before it had even happened.

Cobain knew that he was just another piece of spectacle, that nothing runs better on

MTV than a protest against MTV; knew that his every move was a cliche scripted in advance,

knew that even realizing it is a cliche.

[…] Here even success meant failure, since to succeed would only mean that you were the

new meat on which the system could feed.”

Cobain’s angst was commodified, it became a product, so the more he expressed his angst,

even if it was targeted at his commodification, the more value he gave to that commodity.

If he was pissed at MTV, that anger was going to be milked by MTV itself.

There’s no way he could escape it.

Even Cobain’s very suicide added value to his commodification.

Now, let’s talk about Banksy.

His rage, or at least his indignation, is not objectless like Cobain’s.

Banksy has targeted war, authoritarianism, capitalism, the bourgeoisie, greed and, more

a propos for this video, the art market.

This last sentiment is best expressed in a quote by art critic Robert Hughes, shared

by Banksy:

“But the price of a work of art is now part of its function, its new job is to sit on

the wall and get more expensive.

Instead of being the common property of humankind the way a book is, art becomes the particular

property of somebody who can afford it.”

The art market turns a work of art into a commodity, a rare commodity, which can make

it a very good investment in the right circumstances.

To some, that’s a good thing, to others, it’s a tragedy.

Art, in many ways, is now appreciated, not for its power, its beauty or its challenging

nature, but for its value and for its ability to generate more wealth for its owner.

Think of Banksy’s Central Park kiosk where he hired a man to present spray art, priced

at 60$.

The artworks didn’t get much attention, people weren’t drawn to them, at least not

enough to purchase them.

However, had anybody known these were Banksy works, the kiosk would’ve been empty in

a matter of seconds.

However, this old man sold Banksy’s artworks to people who liked them, either for themselves

or to offer as gifts.

If Banksy had sold them, he wouldn’t have sold artworks, but investments, high value

commodities.

Again, to some people, that’s great!

An artwork can be both great as an artwork and as an investment.

But to other people, Banksy included, this can hinder our ability to appreciate art.

I’d argue that, because we are brought up in a commodified world, we cannot disassociate

the value of a work of art and its price tag, so when the bourgeoisie estimates the price

of a work at 2 million dollars, it’s hard to not have that impair our judgement.

However, that 2 million dollar price tag is not about the work of art in itself, it’s

about how much this work can be worth in the future and how much you, as a buyer, can gain

from it.

And this is extremely harmful for artists, either the ones who are beginning or the ones

who don’t plan on having an international career.

The art market promotes the idea of investing in art, of spending with the idea of reselling

for a higher price.

If you buy a painting from a local artist solely because you really like it, you might

not be able to resell it for its original value.

Honestly, you might not be able to resell it at all and, to the art market, that’s

a bad investment.

It comes to no surprise that the art market has little to nothing to do with art, and

more with wealth, speculation and investment.

I think a true collector, someone who truly appreciates art, can buy an artwork from someone

who’s completely unknown and it wouldn’t matter to them because they bought the art,

not for the name, not for the return on investment, but for the work in itself.

If you buy a work of art to later profit from it, no matter what they tell you, you’re

not buying a work of art, you’re placing money on a nice-looking investment.

So, I started this video by talking about how both Cobain and Banksy were stuck in the

same trap, but what is this trap exactly?

Banksy’s greatest anti-art market stunt was, without a doubt, his shredding of the

Girl with Balloon.

In a nutshell, if you haven’t heard about, this work of art destroyed itself after being

sold at auction.

Banksy protested against the art market by destroying his work of art after it was sold.

If you ask me, it’s an incredible idea, but just like with Kurt Cobain, it would just

add value to the commodity.

When Cobain protested against MTV, he empowered MTV.

When Banksy protests against the art market, he empowers the art market.

This is the trap.

No matter how much you protest the thing you hate, your protest won’t only be unsuccessful,

but detrimental to your goal.

As Fisher wrote: “Here even success meant failure, since to succeed would only mean

that you were the new meat on which the system could feed.”

Banksy is immensely successful and if Banksy is the new meat on which the system can feed,

Banksy is a feast.

And this is not only true for art.

Social movements and even anti-capitalist ideas can be incorporated by capitalism and

resold to us.

The art market knows Banksy is going to criticize it.

The billionaires buying Banksy art know that Banksy will criticize them.

And they love it.

The art market and billionaires don’t see these attacks as dangerous, why not?

Banksy’s stunt was one of the largest stunts in art history.

We have one of the most successful artists in the world completely and publicly rejecting

the main institution of the art world, the art market.

It’s a huge deal, with little to no impact.

The reason why Banksy’s criticism is not only ineffective, but beneficial to the art

market is because it’s all a spectacle.

Events, experiences and art are commodified and sold to us.

They become a spectacle, a show comparable to a Netflix movie.

Our relation to these events can often feel detached, mostly because they are sold to

us almost as fiction.

The mediation between us and the world through images creates this alienating disconnection.

Kurt Cobain killed himself.

This, relayed through mass-media, is sold to us, it’s used to grab our attention,

it becomes a spectacle.

This degradation of the real, in favour of the spectacle, is what makes everything feel

like a show, like it’s all fake.

When seeing Banksy’s Girl with Balloon being shredded as it’s being bought for several

hundreds of thousands of dollars, we see it like we would see a harmless performance in

a circus.

It’s being sold to us as such.

The critique becomes a spectacle and the spectacle, not the critique, becomes the content.

No matter what Banksy does, it will be commodified.

Banksy has become a spectacle, the same way Cobain did.

No matter what they do, whatever they say, that will contribute to their value as commodities.

“Cobain knew that he was just another piece of spectacle, that nothing runs better on

MTV than a protest against MTV”

Banksy is just another piece of spectacle.

Nothing runs better in the art world than a protest against the art world.

Everything Banksy does will become an element of the spectacle and, therefore, a commodity

to be advertised and sold.

The painting being shredded is part of the spectacle, Banksy’s anonymous identity is

part of the spectacle, graffiti is part of the spectacle.

When Banksy, and only Banksy, does illegal graffiti, it’s acceptable, it’s funny,

it’s part of the show.

Cobain and Banksy were turned into spectacles, to a point where their protests or their rage

became meaningless.

Their acts were just spectacles, entertainment bits that are packaged and sold to us just

like any other commodity is.

This commodification of these performances, these experiences and these artists, make

me worry.

Kurt Cobain was so well integrated to MTV culture that, even when he criticized MTV,

he participated in that culture.

Banksy is so well integrated in the art world that, even when they criticize the art world,

they participate in its culture.

How can an artist possibly criticize any institution which they have been so integrated with?

Doesn’t that rob the artist from their power?

What would Banksy have to do to really harm the art world and its market?

Well, they couldn’t make any artwork, because that would contribute to the art world culture

of criticizing the art world.

What if they stopped making art?

Well that could also contribute to the mystery and myth of Banksy, the spectacle.

Banksy is trapped.

As long as they’re an artist in the public eye, they’ll participate, contribute and

empower the very thing they hate, without any chance of meaningfully criticizing these

institutions.

Capitalism and the art world are so powerful that they can turn any of their criticism

into a spectacle and empower themselves through that criticism.

It makes these systems feel untouchable, and unchangeable.

If I can recommend anything, it’s to read Mark Fisher’s Capitalist Realism, Guy Debord’s

Societe du Spectacle and try to identify elements of the spectacle in your own life.

And I’ll leave you with the last line of Mark Fisher’s Capitalist Realism: “From

a situation in which nothing can happen, suddenly anything is possible again.”

Thank you for watching and I’ll see you next time.