PART I
Fetish and the Everyday ONE
From the Sublime to the Subliminal: Fetish Aesthetics
Mobilized Attention
How to define an atmosphere? The word has a specific primary sense, of course, and a scientific definition. It is the invisible layer of breathable air that swathes the planet, sustaining life and exerting the variable pressure we register as weather. Weather is not irrelevant to a poetics of urban atmosphere. But to speak of the atmospherics of a city is also to activate a derived sense of the word, one in which atmosphere refers to the intuition one has, or rather the subliminal awareness, of a certain dimension of particularity, otherness, or strangeness that attaches to certain objects, places, or situations that in other respects are recognizable as ordinary, familiar, or not worthy of special attention. To become aware of an atmosphereâand one of Baudelaireâs most important understandings of poetry is as an agent of such a becoming awareâis to become bafflingly conscious of something that one had been already aware of, somehow, but without knowing it. This is the sense of there being an ungraspable or even uncanny hinterland of things, a dimension that defies definition or analysis because it lies just beyond the domain of the intelligible, and endows them with a mysterious significance. Something like what we refer to when we speak of a city having âlocal color.â
Fetish objects, in particular, are ordinary things that have been strangely âpromotedâ in this way: an item of clothing, perhaps; or an object on display in a store; or some ugly-looking figurine that âbuzzesâ you when you approach it in an anthropological museum. Such objects have or have acquired an atmosphereâa fact that perhaps suggests that the word atmosphere is associated with the sublimation of desire that is at the root of fetish theory, and hence, ultimately, with forms of beauty and of the sacred. I am not far from saying, in fact, that they are or have become allegorized; and by that I mean that if they âspeakâ to us, it is to bespeak âotherness.â1 And that is why this phenomenonâwhereby the familiar trappings of everyday existence, those that we normally pay little or no attention to, become strange and somehow alien when, for whatever reason, we are led to notice them, to attend to their existence and their presenceâmight be thought of as an effect of aesthetic fetishization. Independently of (specifically) erotic, consumerist, or religious desire, attention and the framing of an object that it requires activate in us a need for meaningfulness, and do so to the exact degree that the object has been previously perceivedâor rather not perceived at allâas trivial. In becoming thus allegorized, the object then activates a libido intelligendi, a desire to understand, the strength of which is doubtless a function of the Weberian âdisenchantmentâ to which the modern world seems increasingly subject, since it is the unexpected perception of the everyday world as strange that activates it. Whence that frustrating, tip-of-the-tongue sense of a just-out-of-reach âmeaningâ that constitutes an atmospherics.
That Baudelaire was a prime mover in insisting on the indispensable role of the category of the aesthetic in the modern age is not a matter of dispute. My contention will be that it was in defining the practice of modern art as an atmospherics of urban life, and in practicing such an atmospherics as an allegorization of a vie parisienne that had become everyday reality for his readers, that he invented a new (or rather previously unacknowledged) function for the category of the aesthetic amid the utilitarianism of bourgeois modernity. Art, as a practice of atmospherics, was to enact something like the etymological sense of the word aesthetics; poetry as he practiced it was to function as an aesthesis capable of making sensible the dimension of strangeness inherent, most notably, in the âmoving chaosâ of the familiar urban street.2 It would be a way of channeling the âwonderâ that âswathes and nourishes us like the atmosphereâ but, in the absence of artistic intervention, remains invisible and goes unheeded. Art was to function, in other words, as an antianaesthetics, deploying poiesis as a practice of making capable of transfiguring the ordinary, the unremarkable, the ugly, and the apparently unredeemable because utilitarian, and thusâif not of reenchanting a world bereft of mystery and glamourâthen at least of awakening the poetâs readers to the unconscious state of alienation in which they lived. (I employ the Marxian word unapologetically.3)
As early as the Salon de 1846, then, atmosphĂšre was already a key term of Baudelairean aesthetics. Painting is superior to sculpture, he claims there, with his usual imperturbable assurance (and reserving as always his âdroit de se contredireâ [right to self-contradiction]), and this is because the atmosphere of a paintingâconveyed, in technical terms by its form, its particular deployment of color and lightâcan be taken in at a glance, and as it were, subconsciously. Statues, on the other hand, are too much like natural objects, which are only environnĂ©s dâatmosphĂšre (surrounded by atmosphere) and, for that very reason, require a more exploratory and analytical approach, one that needs time in order to take in their spatial dimensionsâsomething that Baudelaire judges to be âprimitiveâ by comparison with the magical immediacy of paintingâs directness. They are, in the only sense of the word Baudelaire recognized, âfetishesâ (and sculpture, therefore is ennuyeuse [tedious, annoying]).4 The irony is of course that the inventor of modern art should not be able, in 1846, to foresee the enthusiasm for African and Oceanic masks and fetish objects that was to sweep the âcapital of the nineteenth centuryâ in the early years of the twentieth century and would signal a contribution to the invention of modernism. Nevertheless, Baudelaireâs invocation of atmosphere defined the very principle of that new aesthetics; and it will be important for us, therefore, to attend to his later, radically revised, judgment with respect to sculpture as I approach allegory in its relation to âfetish aestheticsâ in chapter 3.
Meanwhile, recalling M. H. Abramsâs famous characterization of the aesthetics of the sublime as ânatural supernaturalism,â we might think of Baudelairean atmospherics as an urban, or artificial, supernaturalismâperhaps even a âsubliminalism.â5 For the Romantic cult of the sublime appears as the principal forerunner of the mid-century turn away from Romanticism that I am interested inâthe turn to an art of fetish-like âatmosphereâ held to define âmodern beauty,â and doing so in terms of a merveilleux detectable in the everyday world of urban modernity. This latter moment thus appears as a further stage, following the era of the sublime, in the Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment history of the de-sacralization of artâa history that itself arises as an entailment of the aesthetic functionâs newly acquired status as an agent of the reenchantment of the world. Turning away from the noble and stirring spectacles of nature that reveal themselves at the limen or threshold, connecting but separating the immanent world and the transcendence of the sacred, a new generation now looks for inspiration to an apparently barren cultural scene of manufacture, production, and trade. But there it discovers two things.
One of those things is the subliminality (if not the sublimity) of a simultaneously conscious and unconscious experience, the becoming aware of that of which one had been unaware. This is an experience not unlike that of the uncanny, but it resembles in its strangeness the Marxian experience of disalienation and is described by Baudelaire in terms of the cityâs atmosphere. Such an awareness of the uncanny has historical roots, of course, in the aesthetics of the gothic and the fantastic, with their emphasis on mysterious intimations of a beyond. But the other discovery is that of the power of artistic shaping: of form and the labor of mise en forme. It is form that molds an object of representation, and by isolating and framing it as an object of attention reawakens in the observer a sense of wonderment and desire, an awareness of atmosphere, in the presence of something otherwise recognizable as familiar and ordinaryâthe very sense, that is, that the dailiness of city life tends to erode. In Marxâs analysis of commodity fetishism, it is labor that transforms an object having only use value into one that enjoys the added attractiveness he calls exchange value. But the condition of such a transformation is that the crucial input of labor must be rendered transparent, and thus invisible. Similarly, artistic form, the mark of aesthetic labor, can reveal the atmospherics of its object as a practice of beautification and agency of wonder, but only under the condition of becoming itself invisible. Such is the shamanistic sleight-of-hand of a fetishizing aestheticsâa magic that Baudelaire initially subscribed to, but in the end, came to challenge, as we shall see.6
Awakening to Noise
That challenge arose as a consequence of a lifelong evolution in the poetâs assessment of the value and significance of noiseâof noise as an inevitable component of an aesthetics of fetish he had initially conceived as the necessary harmonizing of noisy everyday ugliness associated with city life, and the intimations of a timeless, ideal beauty, the sublimity that nature was held to offer. This essay offers a review of the evidence available to us in Baudelaireâs poetic writing of that extended and painful evolution, which itself manifestly occurred in response to the major social upheavals France was undergoing in his (short) lifetime. I mean on the one hand the brutal transition, if transition is the word, from a largely rural society to one dominated by a new industrial, urban, and capitalist economy increasingly devoted to bourgeois valuesâin other words, the traumatic coming of modernityâand on the other hand the political violence and other upheavals, most notably of the post-1848 period, that made the enthusiastic early socialist and harmonian dreams of the 1830s and 1840s seem like so many naĂŻve and irresponsible fantasies. My outline of Baudelaireâs evolution will tell not only a story of disillusionment, but also of remarkable intellectual and aesthetic flexibility and adaptability. And although I will have to present it methodically, as if it were a straightforward and unidirectional movement forward, it will be worth remembering that while Baudelaire displays an astonishing thirst for new thought and fresh ideas, changing his mind with alacrity, he also seems never to have fully abandoned any aesthetic conviction he once held, even as he kept moving on, new experiment by new experiment. (Whence, of course, his ardent if ironic defense of âle droit de se contredire.â) After all, the inventor of âmodern beauty,â it should be remembered, was simultaneously among the last of Franceâs most classical poets: an inspiration to Rimbaud and, later, the Surrealists while admired and appreciated by the Parnassians. The story of his awakening to noise, then, was itself inevitably a noisy one, as indeed are most evolutions, although my brief essay cannot help but simplify and schematize it.
Given Baudelaireâs interest in atmosphere, a confrontation with noise was inevitable, if only because noise, in all of the wordâs many possible senses, was and is the crucial constituent of any modern cityâs atmospherics. Noise is both the deafening racket one cannot ignoreâthe ârue assourdissanteâ (deafening street) of âĂ une passanteââand the largely unnoticed, because persistent and familiar, background to city dwellersâ lives: that of which we become conscious only to realize that we had always been, in some sense, aware of it, without having known that we were (something that âLes sept vieillardsâ might be thought to allegorize). Both alienating and disalienating in this sense, noise is also a convenient metaphor for the many forms of disorder, disarray, distraction, and fragmented experience offered by the life of the street, like the âchaos mouvantâ (moving chaos) of trafficâin Baudelaireâs day not yet regulatedâso compellingly described in âPerte dâaurĂ©ole,â or of course the innumerable busy chantiers, the messy worksites that disrupted the cityscape in the Haussmann era, as described in âLe Cygneâ and represented in the extraordinary lithographs and photographs of the period (e.g., Daumier and Marville).7
Finally, the word noise today designates all the static or interference that arises in channels of communication, and by extension the entropy that similarly affects all functioning systems and makes their smoothest operations secretly inefficient, a parasitic presence that is both necessary to life and the consumer of our energy and being. The laws of thermodynamics that include and enshrine the concept of entropy were formulated early in the nineteenth century as a direct consequence of the Industrial Revolution and the invention of the steam engine; but Baudelaire seems unaware of this sense of the word noise. He does, however, recognize the phenomenon itselfâin the disorderly energy, the âelectricityâ of the crowd, for instance, and in the alienated encounters, the failures to connect, that are dramatized in so many of the prose poems in Le Spleen de Paris. So finally we might recognize the devastating whistle that fatally interrupts the mimeâs entrancing performance in âUne mort hĂ©roĂŻqueâ as the poetâs most striking representation of noiseâs destructive power, as well as of its direct relevance to art.
And if Baudelaire connects noise in all its possible senses to the brooding atmosphere that enshrouds the city of Paris, it is because, finally, he intuits its relation, not only to the pressure of weather with its threatening stormsâle temps quâil faitâbut also to the passing of time, as well as the destructive force of devastating events and violent change that are sometimes generated out of the unheeded, moment-by-moment, temporal process and recognized as history: le temps qui passe. Tellingly, the noisy street, where one is exposed to weather and to passing time, is for Baudelaire both the site where the cityâs atmosphere is most readily detected and the site where history happens. And that is doubtless why the many permanent denizens of the streetâI mean those who eke out some kind of existence there and themselves form a crucial part of its noisy lifeâseem to be endowed with a special knowledge that escapes the busy passers-by who hurry from point A to point B. The ragpickers, beggars, prostitutes, and street performers of all kinds (mimes, saltimbanques, musicians)âthe whole class of forains, those âon the outsideâ (Latin foris)âboth attract and intrigue the flĂąneur poet, himself an habituĂ© of the street. They do so, I suggest, because on the one hand they form part of the cityâs atmosphere, personifying its noisy life in their fringe existence, while on the other they appear to have acquired a wisdom from their exposed existence that indoor dwellersâa metaphor for the bourgeoisieâare unaware of. âLes Yeux des pauvresâ is readable, perhaps, as an allegory of this tantalizing (un)readability of Baudelaireâs street people.8
All this city noiseâalienating din, steady background hum, unruly disorder bordering on chaos but also a certain intriguing strangenessâcontrasts, of course, with the supposed stillness, silence, and timelessness of âimmutableâ nature. (That nature is itself subject to entropy is a post-Baudelairean realization.) Baudelaireâs awakening to noise as the specific indicator of urban modernity and the crucial component of the cityâs atmosphere is interestingly literalized in a recent novel by the Australian writer Gail Jones. Dreams of Speakingâa title that resonates with Baudelaireâs own pursuit of a language of noiseâis an âAlice in Wonderlandâ novel, one that epitomizes our inheritance of a post-Baudelairean aesthetics of modernity as the sense of strange and indeed alien beauty associated with, specifically, urban civilization. It entwines the twin themes of disenchanted reenchantmentâthe unsuspected strangeness of the familiar and the similarly unnoticed noisiness of the worldâin an exploration of the atmospherics of cities (Perth, Australia; Paris; Nagasaki, Japan), a poetics of technological gadgetry (interestingly akin to Baudelaireâs âMorale du joujouâ [1853]), and finally an account of the strains and pleasures of alienated relations (an irritatingly persistent ex-boyfriend; the comfortable friendship of a young Australian woman with an elderly Japanese survivor of Hiroshima; the uncomfortable loving affections of an adopted daughter and her therefore unrelated parents and sister). Still jet-lagged from her long flight from Australia, Alice awakens in the night in her Paris apartment in the Marais, near the Seine:
In the middle of the night she heard it againâthe sound of the river. Then she listened carefully and once more found that she was mistaken. What she heard this time was the material commotion of the city: sirens, wheels, decelerating buses, footsteps, calls, mobile phones. There was the squeal of an almost collision and a cry of abuse. There was a plane overhead, dragging decibels in its wake. Vehicles of every kind. The snarl of a motorbike. The rumble of garbage trucks with their brute growling innards, the roll and click-clack of a late-night skateboard. All this activity in the air, this routine distortion. All this noisy encasement and mobilized intention. Alice wanted silence. She wanted the nullity of deep space. In her bed in Paris, she experienced a twinge of homesickness. Not the longing for a place, so much, as for a space into...