I like to think that artistic practice grants us both a capacity and a pathway to reflect on the world, to address its problems (which are our own), to generate questions and, at the same time, to offer visions of possible worlds. This thought has only strengthened as I have worked on this writing, so I must thank ADN for the generous invitation to reflect on these issues. In times of conflict and crisis, such as the ones we are currently experiencing, can artistic practices emerge not only as a critical mirror of our realities but also as a space for collective emancipation and transformation?
The exhibition "Recherche sur l'origine 1974" by Robert Filliou seems to me to be a good starting point for these reflections. In it Filliou shows us the fundamental intersection between human creation and cosmic processes. His Principle of Equivalence suggests that all forms of creation, including the poorly made and the unmade, have their place in the fabric of existence. This inclusiveness, rooted in socialist and anarchist traditions, reminds us that artistic creation can be both a process of learning and an act of resistance. Where precisely do the dimensions of aesthetics and politics meet if not in the act of creating—the collective capacity to intervene in the world, to imagine, and to alter a given state of things? The act of creation dismantles one of the most dangerous ideas from a social and political standpoint: the notion that “things are the way they are.” This idea (or perhaps we could call it an ideology) denies agency while becoming complicit in any status quo.
In this sense, art seems to have a dual capacity. On one hand, it is a tool for critical reflection that allows us to better understand the world in which we live and to situate ourselves within it through aesthetic experience. On the other hand, it also enables us to collectively imagine other worlds and possible futures. Perhaps this is where the “lucid optimism” Filliou employed in his work finds relevance, bridging the realm of critical reflection with that of creative action. This duality is echoed in different philosophical theories and approaches that consider aesthetics from an emancipatory perspective.
Theodor Adorno, for example, argued that critical reflection is an essential component of art. For him, art should serve as a form of resistance against consumer culture and the cultural industry that tends to homogenize subjectivities. Jacques Rancière, in turn, adds another layer to this discussion by suggesting that emancipation arises from our capacity to imagine new realities. According to this perspective, art has the power to redistribute the sensible. It is, therefore, not merely a way of representing the world but an invitation to rethink and reconfigure it, to imagine alternatives that we have not yet reached, but that are not entirely beyond our reach.
This question of reach gives particular relevance to Filliou's Optimistic Box #1, created in 1968 and included in the exhibition. This small wooden box contains a cobblestone and two pink cards that read: "thank god for modern weapons (…) we don’t throw stones at each other anymore." Both poetic and critical, the piece reflects on war and violence as inherent in the human condition, but, above all, it speaks to a loss of faith in the modern myth of progress. At a time when distressing images of war are so pervasive, this optimistic box takes on a weight and strength intensified by historical perspective.
Cobblestones, a symbol of resistance during the May 1968 protests in France, became projectiles in the hands of a generation fighting for its voice and its right to imagine new modes of existence. Similarly, certain artistic practices might be seen as a kind of projectile. How can art contribute to an emancipatory politics? What is the relationship between aesthetics and politics, if not the act of creating and reconfiguring the sensible? Do these reflections hold any relevance in today’s postmodern context?
Looking at Filliou's work, we see a celebration of creativity as a profoundly political act. His legacy, along with the critical reflections of thinkers like Adorno and Rancière, urges us to view art as a field of action where we can explore the complexity of the human condition and the possibility of a more just future. Too much optimism? In times of conflict, it is essential to remember that collective creation has the potential to imagine and build realities as solid as cobblestones.
________________________________________________________________
Esmeralda Gómez Galera (Ciudad Real, 1993) is a researcher, educator, curator, and contemporary art manager. Trained in Fine Arts and Philosophy, she holds a Ph.D. in Arts, Humanities, and Education. Currently based in Mallorca, she works as an independent contemporary art professional, balancing her university teaching with curatorial projects and writing the newsletter Highlights Contemporary, which focuses on Balearic artistic production.