ABSTRACT
If what I have argued about the avant-garde at this stage of its development is true, then we can draw a number of conclusions, the most important of which flows from the manner in which we collectively sustain, extend, and rejuvenate its poetic values within a multiform tradition, becoming responsible for the tradition itself as well as for our own more focused definitions of and hopes for it. To put that lesson in terms derived from Claudia Rankine and Stanley Cavell, my argument suggests that we most productively meet the challenge of such participation when we welcome the critical conversation of friends over our public texts and, as friends in return, refrain from accusing others of personal and intellectual deficiencies when the meanings of our shared avant-garde values begin to diverge, for doing so destroys thoughtful and productive poetic engagement within our community and the rich artistic multiformity it produces. With this lens in mind, I want to return briefly to the controversy around Kenneth Goldsmith’s performance of “The Body of Michael Brown” because it provides a recent and well-known example by which I can discuss the implications of my argument in a concrete manner, after which I can shift to a wider view of the avant-garde moving forward in light of its history.
