"NFTs seem to me just a way for artists to get a little piece of the action from global capitalism, our own cute little version of financialisation. "
Brian Eno is one of the most accomplished
artists working today. Having given us the genre of ambient music, he also
produced many of the most remarkable acts of the past 40+ years. He is also
known for his sound, video, and digital art including 77 Million Paintings,
which, with its generative spirit of abundance, might be the opposite of what
NFTs represent.
Brian once pissed into Duchamp's famous
urinal, unhappy with how the gallery world was misinterpreting Duchamp's
philosophy of art. Having known Brian for some time – we both share an interest
in cybernetics and the work of Stafford Beer – I reached out to him to ask his
opinions about NFTs and what he makes of the broader political import of
crypto.
If NFTs are really Duchamp's Readymades
reversed, as the American art historian David Joselit argued in a
much-discussed short essay from April 2021, what better figure to ask for
answers than the man who urinated into Duchamp's Fountain
~ Evgeny Morozov
Keywords: NFTs, Art, Financialisation, Robin
Hood-ism, Marcel Duchamp
We have just launched this site, by the way.
But do follow us on Twitter!
As an artist, you’ve always reached out to
economists, collaborating with Yanis Varoufakis, Mariana Mazzucato, and others.
You have also been one of the earliest high-profile advocates of Universal
Basic Income. Your political compass seems to be working rather well. What’s
one thing about global capitalism that could help us understand the context in
which crypto has become so central to the public debate?
I see a world absolutely awash with loose
money and speculation because the various governments of the world, unwilling
to make any serious structural changes that would threaten the present status
quo, have decided to solve every problem by printing more money to throw at it.
This is presumably why stocks soar when there’s an emergency like Covid –
because speculators realise that a new emergency means a new infusion of money,
and they know that much of it will end up in their hands.
I can understand why the people who’ve done
well from NFTs are pleased, and it’s natural enough in a libertarian world to
believe that something that benefits you must automatically be ‘right’ for the
whole world.
There is much excitement about crypto these
days, with many claims made in the name of these technologies. What do you make
of their promises?
I see a set of solutions but I don’t know what
problems they exist to solve other than 'How can we use these to absorb all
this spare money that’s washing around?'. Most of the conversation I hear is
asking the question ‘What could we do with these technologies?': which doesn’t
mean 'how could we change the world into a better place?' but 'How could we
turn them into money?'.
Is there much that, in your view, crypto technologies can do for
artists?
As for the effects on artists, although I imagine there can and
perhaps even are now interesting creative uses of crypto technologies, as yet I
don’t see them. I am not sure what is being brought into the world that makes
any difference to anything other than some strings of numbers moving about in
some bank accounts. I want to know what is changing, what is being made
different, what is helping, what is moving? I don’t see any answers to that
question.
NFTs seem to me just a way for artists to get a little piece of the
action from global capitalism, our own cute little version of financialisation.
Quite a lot of numbers have moved across bank accounts due to the
explosion of NFTs… Isn’t it something to celebrate?
I can understand why the people who’ve done well from it are
pleased, and it’s natural enough in a libertarian world to believe that
something that benefits you must automatically be ‘right’ for the whole world.
That belief is a version of what I call ‘automaticism’: the idea that if you
leave things alone and let something or other – the market, nature, human will
– take its course unimpeded you will automatically get a better result than you
would by tinkering with it. The people who hold beliefs of this kind don’t have
any qualms about tinkering themselves but just want a situation where nobody
else gets to tinker. Especially the state.
Oddly, today's libertarianism seems to wear world-saving clothes,
talking about community, decentralization, the need to disrupt entrenched
institutions (including central banks) under the banner of web3. Ironically,
this is also what the big platforms that we associate with Web 2.0 – Spotify
for music, Uber for transportation, Airbnb for hospitality – used to say about
the industries that they were disrupting.
Much of the energy behind crypto arises from the very strong need
that some people feel to operate outside of a state, and therefore outside of
any sort of democratic communal overview. The idea that Ayn Rand, that
Nietzsche-for-Teenagers toxin, should have had her whacky ideas enshrined in a
philosophy about money is what is terrifying to me. But I still don’t really
understand what it is they think they’ve done. Maybe I just don’t get it!
Can NFTs be a contemporary form of Robin Hood-ism? Is it possible
that artists can use these tools to divert some of the global trillions off
into some more productive and humane directions?
Why don't you dabble in NFTs yourself?
I’ve been approached several times to ‘make an NFT’. So far nothing
has convinced me that there is anything worth making in that arena. ‘Worth
making’ for me implies bringing something into existence that adds value to the
world, not just to a bank account. If I had primarily wanted to make money I
would have had a different career as a different kind of person. I probably
wouldn’t have chosen to be an artist. NFTs seem to me just a way for artists to
get a little piece of the action from global capitalism, our own cute little
version of financialisation. How sweet – now artists can become little
capitalist assholes as well.
There are, however, some people on the left
who say that some of these technologies could help make the current digital
economy fairer. Do you agree?
Can NFTs be a contemporary form of Robin
Hood-ism? Is it possible that artists can use these tools to divert some of the
global trillions off into some more productive and humane directions? This is
what I would like to understand, though it presents the interesting moral question
as to whether clean things can be done with murky money.
All the foregoing doesn’t mention the biggest issue: that in a
warming world a new technology that uses vast amounts of energy as ‘proof of
work’ – that’s to say, simply to establish a certain badge of exclusivity –
really is quite insane. All that energy is making nothing that we need. I know
there’s ‘proof of stake’ but I don’t know if that can actually work unless
everybody changes over to it. And even if it did, it doesn’t address the other
issues that bother me.
There’s a lot of hype around these things right now but is there
any hope we’ll get a bit more sober about them in 2022?
I am trying to keep an open mind about these
questions. People I like and trust are convinced they’re the best thing since
sliced bread, so I wish I could have a more positive view but right now I
mainly see hustlers looking for suckers. And lots of bright-eyed artists
willing to play the latter role. Forgive my cynicism… I’m not feeling too
positive right now.
https://the-crypto-syllabus.com/brian-eno-on-nfts-and-automatism/
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario